Contents

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarthak Sinha (2nd nomination)

Sarthak Sinha[edit]

Sarthak Sinha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

There is no notability according to WP:PROF. (there are 3 publications--Canadian Young Scientist Journal, Journal of Undergraduate Research and a poster at a meeting-not surprisingly, none of them have been cited.) The award is apparently a student award, not a national level award for actual scientific accomplishments. The question is the applicability of GNG and BLP1E. Several similar afds have been decided in various ways. My argument is that coverage of someone because their youth, or winning a student contest, is not notability, and certainly not if most of the coverage is affiliated with the organisations sponsoring the program. There is no substantial 3rd party reference, ref.12, Globe & Mail top 20 under 20 is a mere listing with a photo. DGG ( talk ) 19:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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}}.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 01:26, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Editor's response: This article has been considerably revised to include more citations from media coverage which this individual has received. The notability of this individual isn't entirely in his scientific contributions. It's in his ability to stay influential in expressing his views through platforms and collaborations with the TED group, charity organizations and award programs. The content he has produced has reached millions of people, gained significant ongoing press coverage, he has held key positions within the MS Society, Canadian young scientist journal, ect. and is someone I strongly suspect will continue to be influential as a scientist and as an activist in the upcoming future.

Other similar profiles of notable youth in sciences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_Burhanpurkar

Again, this individual is not recognized for her scientific merit in terms of quality and quantity of publications, but rather for being active, engaging and influential in her community.

Other similar profiles of notable youth selected as Top 20 Under 20 in Canada: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shane_Feldman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jose.cook (talk • contribs) 04:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC) — Jose.cook (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Delete. This is yet another SPA-created, media-complicit, fan/autobio article of an "undergraduate scientist". We are still having problems adjudicating the Jacob Barnett article and hardly need another PUFF piece. Since this person might go on to do notable things, I think the official assessment is WP:TOOSOON. Agricola44 (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]

• Keep. Follows the general notability guidelines which states: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kate.huff (talk • contribs) 06:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per DGG and Agricola44 Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO and is a Undergraduate student and at best WP:TOOSOON.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

we might well want to discuss Maya Burhanpurkar, though I see some considerably more significant awards. DGG ( talk ) 17:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Sounds like a smart guy. I'm sure he'll do well when he starts his career. But this is way, way, way WP:TOOSOON. Opabinia regalis (talk) 18:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment An editor has deleted the delete comments and added a keep comment. Another SP. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 10:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete essentially per Opabinia Regalis; this is most likely a case of WP:TOOSOON, although it might never end up being notable. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:28, 21 January 2016 (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.