- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep (in accordance with WP:RELIST, which provides that a "relisted discussion may be closed once consensus is determined without necessarily waiting a further seven days"). Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 06:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
TG Mohandas
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- TG Mohandas ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
Fails WP:GNG, and WP:POLITICIAN. Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 10:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 April 14. — cyberbot I Talk to my owner:Online 11:05, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:19, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:07, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: He gets pretty good news coverage on the internet, almost on a regular basis. The subject is not a politician, so WP:POLITICIAN not applies. 137.97.61.194 ( talk) 15:34, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
- One of the strings to his bow is clearly that of politician, so WP:POLITICIAN does apply, and Mohandas clearly does not pass it. That simply means that he should be judged according to the general notability guideline, which he may or may not pass, according to the coverage that he has received in independent reliable sources. Phil Bridger ( talk) 18:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "One of the strings to his bow is clearly that of politician" ? Making comments and public speeches in political subjects does not makes a man politician by default. Nor does he satisfy the definition of a politician by his occupation. WP:POLITICIAN does not apply. 137.97.89.175 ( talk) 11:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: He is a leading media personality with two popular programs which is still running. He is also a leading public interest litigent. WP:POLITICIAN does not applies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CosmicAdvent ( talk • contribs) 20:21, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
- There is no in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are indepndent of the subject is fails GNG. Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 05:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep : TG Mohandas is the head of intellectual wing in Kerala of the current ruling party of India, Bharatheeya Janatha Party. He has contributed heavily as an RTI activist and as a litigator, to protect the rights of Hindus and their places of worship, called temples in the state of Kerala. Hindus are being subjected to institutional harassment by the leftist government and he is also being harassed in social media and internet for fighting legally against this. This harassment is evident even in the above edits which is against the community standards of Wikipedia.
1. Fight against mismanagement in temple administration [1] 2. Fight against mismanagement in temple [2] 3. Fight against forceful acquisition of temple by Devaswom [3] 4. Fight against unlawful activities. [4] 5. Sabarimala Petition [5]
References
- ^ https://www.livelaw.in/sc-issues-notice-on-pleas-against-govt-controlling-devaswom-boards-seeks-participation-of-devotees-in-temple-administration/
- ^ https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/hc-admits-petition-for-ban-on-entry-of-non-hindus/article25637804.ece
- ^ https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64595022/
- ^ https://www.deccanherald.com/national/fund-collection-in-madanis-name-in-kerala-179979.html
- ^ https://www.pgurus.com/conversation-with-mohandas-t-g-on-why-kerala-govt-is-disobeying-supreme-court-verdict-on-sabarimala/
-- Rsubodhlal ( talk) 15:03, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Being the head of a national parties state wing's intellectual wing doesn't make him notable. There is no in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are indepndent of the subject and no evidence he played a major role in politics or election campaigning .Thus Delete.
Akhiljaxxn (
talk)
05:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- They are not just passing mentions, either he, his public interest litigation or social comments are the subject. He is not a politician to play a major role in politics or election campaigning, no one has made such an argument here. 137.97.89.175 ( talk) 12:29, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
- Being the head of a national parties state wing's intellectual wing doesn't make him notable. There is no in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are indepndent of the subject and no evidence he played a major role in politics or election campaigning .Thus Delete.
Akhiljaxxn (
talk)
05:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep:He is a well known Hindu nationalist from Kerala 109.161.160.184 ( talk) 17:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- Being an Hindu nationalist is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass. Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 05:37, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
- (I found the following comment on the talk page, so copying here. Phil Bridger ( talk) 15:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC))
- Keep : He is a well known person in Kerala as well as India and intellectual leader in Bharatiya Janata Party. He has a major role in case against Travancore Devaswom Board in Supreme Court of India. [1]
References
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiranrs143 ( talk • contribs)
- I would like to make a plea to people to concentrate on whether Mohandes is the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources, per the general notability guideline. I recognise that some sources have been provided, but their impact gets lost in statements about what a wonderful Hindu nationalist he is. Such statements are only likely to make people look at this article with suspicion, because Wikipedia follows a neutral point of view, not a Hindu nationalist one. Phil Bridger ( talk) 15:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
I think this article should be retained according to the General notability guidelines..!!
References
Padavalam Kuttan Pilla ( talk) 11:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As already noted above, we need fewer statements on how wonderful and important this person is, as that is completely besides the point of WP:GNG, WP:POLITICIAN, and WP:ANYBIO. It would be helpful if the "keep" !voters could indicate 2 or 3 of the best references that in their opinion support notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk) 12:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisting comment: As already noted above, we need fewer statements on how wonderful and important this person is, as that is completely besides the point of WP:GNG, WP:POLITICIAN, and WP:ANYBIO. It would be helpful if the "keep" !voters could indicate 2 or 3 of the best references that in their opinion support notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk) 12:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Weak keep. He is an important individual (I think). The news search brings up plenty of coverage. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5], and let's use WP:COMMONSENSE please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mosaicberry ( talk • contribs) 15:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep on the basis of the high profile of the subject in question (thus satisfying WP:GNG); this includes large numbers of articles referencing him and his activism in both regional and national newspapers. -- RaviC ( talk) 00:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/news/india/bharatiya-janata-party-fumes-at-ias-officer-tv-anupama-for-being-bias/articleshow/68777157.cms
- ^ https://scroll.in/latest/900077/devotees-of-all-religions-have-the-right-to-enter-sabarimala-temple-observes-kerala-high-court
- ^ http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2018/oct/29/sabarimala-is-for-all-ban-on-non-hindus-will-ruin-secular-fabric-kerala-hc-1891561.html
- ^ https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/every-genuine-devotee-will-be-offered-necessary-assistance-at-sabarimala-kerala-government-to-high-court/articleshow/67368829.cms
- ^ https://www.newsx.com/national/kerala-bjp-leader-approaches-high-court-seeking-ban-on-entry-of-non-hindus-in-sabarimala-temple
- Keep The above mentioned References is enough for his WP:GNG so I believe this article does meet notability criteria and should be kept Sanalkumarsidhu ( talk) 07:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: TG Mohandas' page views are higher than that of State Police Chief Lokanath Behera, ministers Kadakampally Surendran, G. Sudhakaran, A. K. Balan, Rajya Sabha MP Elamaram Kareem, Binoy Viswam etc. This number of readers doesn't come here if he was a non-notable person. This is to show his public influence for those who don't know about TG Mohandas. 2405:204:D30F:4375:B1A4:2113:103D:2C72 ( talk) 07:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Page views isn't a valid reason to keep. So far, nobody has offered a policy-grounded rationale why the topic is notable and should be kept. Nobody has offered any sources that discuss the topic in depth. That's really all that matters here. This isn't a matter of WP:ILIKEIT or WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Akhiljaxxn ( talk) 17:49, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: As well as the sources identified above he is Definitely meets WP:Notability -- Padavalam Kuttan Pilla Talk 15:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Following an overturned NAC, I am relisting because of the number of SPAs in this AfD. I see only one keep !vote from an established editor here; a "keep" closure is not clearly appropriate.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Relisting comment: Following an overturned NAC, I am relisting because of the number of SPAs in this AfD. I see only one keep !vote from an established editor here; a "keep" closure is not clearly appropriate.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep I disagree that this fails WP:GNG. Horse Eye Jack ( talk) 18:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: The sources are reliable and meets WP:Notability. - MA Javadi ( talk) 15:52, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- Keep and Close Admittedly, this is not a subject where I can claim to be an expert, but I think that I am smart enough to use Google News and find multiple articles from that region's media that go to some length in citing Mr. Mohandas's ongoing work [1]. I believe this article will benefit from a rewrite and improved sourcing - and that seems to be an issue with many articles that are recklessly thrown into these deletion debates. And, after more than two weeks online and multiple relisting, I think it is safe to say that it is time to move on and stop bickering over this article. Capt. Milokan ( talk) 18:43, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.