Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pinaki Chattopadhyay

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 delete. Courcelles (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pinaki Chattopadhyay

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't believe the subject meets wikipedia notability standards for notability as a academic, author, or elocutionist. Most of the sources cited in the article are unreliable websites or self-published sources, and I couldn't verify the few citations to mainstream newspapers mentioned, or find any reliable secondary sources searching through google news, dedicated India-news search tools, or Proquest. Abecedare (talk) 16:04, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Abecedare (talk) 16:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —SpacemanSpiff 18:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - does not meet WP:NPROF (his most cited work has 6 cites), WP:AUTHOR or WP:GNG. He received no hits in News, Highbeam or JSTOR. Books returned a few hits, but they appear to be for a biochemist of the same name. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:01, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Likely delete as I found nothing better than this and this (this last one seems to have one link for a P. Chattopadhyay, not sure if it's him). Pinging DGG for comment. SwisterTwister talk 03:59, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Clearly not notable under WP:PROF--low citations --most cited article is 20; being a reviewer for journals is nota notability. I can't as easily judge the rest, but the oral recitation material seems trivial, with the references essentially mere notices. DGG ( talk ) 04:08, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.