Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Anand Ranganathan - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

1453:- there is a lot of stuff swirling around here but he never seems quite to reach the various notability criteria. News reports about the TB thing, for example, are the sort of guff that journalists like to regurgitate from press releases but science is a slow-moving thing and there is no evidence that it has gotten anywhere. Similarly, he has been on the lower rungs of the IAS ladder, which makes it more of a limited scholarship award than membership. He's not met our criteria, as far as I can see, although he may do one day. - 1053:. The introduction says that "Anand is known for his contribution towards development of a vaccine, for Tuberculosis". This seems to be the only claim in the introduction for real noteworthiness. (I don't mean to criticize the preceding sentence, which appears to be a straightforward description, and as such is proper.) If he is indeed known for this contribution (which we later read "was widely reported by the media"), then what is this contribution, and how has it been portrayed in scientific/medical publications? -- 270:) and got into a bizarre controversy; that nobody bothered about except a right-wing-non RS (OpEd). He is also supposedly a free speech absolutist who eulogizes Ambedkar but those are not pathways to encyclopedic notability or so I believe. Thus, I'm left with his' writing three books, which hardly made any buzz or were any acclaimed (Fails 52:. After reading the discussion there appears to be a rough consensus to delete. The only viable WP:PAG based argument presented by those favoring retention looks to hinge on the of interpretation of point 3 of WP:PROF. Unfortunately, I find the interpretive arguments presented by those favoring deletion to be generally persuasive. 763:
of his books and that says a lot. Which international media featured him for his work? Every-time somebody claims that they have discovered a noble cure XYZ for disease ABC; media flocks on the person. If you read the relevant sections of newspapers from across the world over the past few years; you
329:
The language used by you is clearly derogatory and biased. He is not a journalist, but a columnist. I guess you don't understand the difference. Many similar articles, with much worse citations are still active on Knowledge (XXG), why is this article being singled out, despite having sources such as
495:
The person clearly appears regularly on TV, with the channel having the highest TRP, has more than a 100k followers on twitter, has written multiple books. Newspapers like The Hindu have taken his interview. But that doesn't matter to you, does it? You wouldn't allow me to move similar articles to
491:
I see what you're trying to do here. You allow other articles with worse sources to remain on Knowledge (XXG), as it is written by people you know, you will target me if I apply the same criteria here, but will bully me here to find more sources, you have already made up your mind about it. It
860:
will also probably mean squat to you, since you have already made up your mind. So let's revise. 1. Interviews (even in national newspaper) don't contribute to notability. 2.Having multiple published papers doesn't contribute to notability. 3. Coverage of research in multiple national and
764:
will get at-least a few thousand people who have developed the cure to treat AIDS or developed a new drug agsinst malaria/TB/Cancer or made some sort of unimaginable breakthrough. It's almost always an eerie quietness thereafter and years later, they just dis-appear into the void.
1384:
The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor
603:
coverage. You need to accept that interviews are not counted towards establishment of notability, because they are almost-always intellectually independent, as over here. And, an interview in RepublicTV which has morphed into a right-wing-propaganda medium does not do any
705: 335: 1280:
is not at the level of the Royal Society nor the National Academy of Sciences, though it is a major scholarly society for which Fellowship confers notability. If Ranganathan becomes a Fellow of the Indian Academy of Sciences, he will be notable for WP under
528: 206: 1010: 1235: 861:
international media doesn't contribute to notability 3. Being a speaker at multiple ORF events, TEDeX or Pondi Lit fest and Mangaluru Lit Fest doesn't contribute to notability. While pages like
1119:
rather than a Fellowship. His Associateship page does mention tuberculosis work, so if it had led to a vaccine in the ensuing decade, it is odd that his name is not mentioned in the articles
755:
would have given you the answers of your first query. He authored 3 books, so what? There are millions of published authors; do you believe that confers some special notability? I can't get a
1087: 856:
Thanks, next time I will make sure to take your approval before wasting hours, trying to find sources and write an article, because apparently this gives you a power trip. Coverage from
159: 919:
MSAR has got multiple obituaries in relevant academic journals; search for them. The current quality of an article is not any relevant indicator of the notability of the subject.
1285:. You contend that the Associateship he held confers notability in the same way. Certainly it is selective and elected but it is also an early-career opportunity available for 436:
I have added more sources from mainstream media, coverage in Republic TV and The Hindu. He has won various awards, as mentioned in the article, with credible sources such as
200: 1239: 609:
I would have given some minimal thoughts; if he had spoken over TED; as you claim. But he has spoken over TEDx (which is radically watered-down version of the former).
492:
doesn't matter how many sources I find, whether it is The Hindu, Republic, India Today, World Economic Forum, TED, Times of India. You are going to delete the article.
511: 1226:.He was a member of the elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association .Both fellows and associates are notable nowhere does 984: 278: 1439: 1417: 1259: 1137: 1091: 353: 91: 906:
FWIW, (1) interviews seldom contribute to notability (2) multiple published papers doesn't contribute to notability unless at-least 2 or 3 of the papers are
737:
was described as a News Channel on Knowledge (XXG). Unless you edit it and replace it with "right-wing-propaganda medium", this argument doesn't make sense.
106: 1391: 296: 1399: 1197:
or another subject-specific guideline, though nothing I have seen to date is persuasive, and certainly I do not see a case for inclusion under WP:PROF.
300: 413: 166: 1310: 857: 304: 708:. Authorship of three books, and his work on Malaria and Tuberculosis that got covered in multiple national and international media. His page on 701: 275: 1182: 898: 132: 127: 914:
and is almost always a non-significant achievement in the long-run and (4) speakers at these events indeed do not contribute to notability.
136: 1293:
future Fellows. I do not think it is sufficient for automatic notability, but I will initiate a discussion to see what others think.
119: 1078:
AND MEETS point 3 The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association.
86: 79: 17: 1435: 1413: 930: 870: 815: 793: 775: 742: 724: 669: 647: 569: 552: 535: 518: 501: 468: 445: 381: 349: 321: 221: 188: 1023: 997: 1258:
The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a
910:
cited (3) coverage of research in national media (I'm still clueless, as to the international coverage) usually falls under
100: 96: 733:"an interview in RepublicTV which has morphed into a right-wing-propaganda medium does not do any favor."-Last I remember, 623:
Having hordes of twitter followers is not a criterion of our notability. Those numbers are ridiculously easy to manipulate.
420: 1271: 1431: 1409: 959: 920: 866: 805: 783: 765: 738: 720: 659: 637: 578: 565: 548: 531: 514: 497: 458: 454: 441: 392: 371: 363: 345: 311: 1501: 40: 1169: 366:, what SN says below. Also, appearing in panel on a TV is hardly an indicaator of encyclopedic notability. Also, see 281: 1277: 1108: 1075: 310:
If anyone does a GSearch, he/she might be expected to find several mentions in OpIndia. It's a non-reliable source.
182: 1193:-index of 7, which is hardly the stuff of WP:PROF-passing wikibios. I am willing to be persuaded of a pass under 259: 1462: 1421: 1371: 1353: 1322: 1302: 1243: 1206: 1095: 1062: 1045: 1028: 1002: 971: 932: 874: 817: 795: 777: 746: 728: 671: 649: 573: 556: 539: 522: 505: 470: 449: 425: 406: 383: 357: 323: 61: 288:
part. book though) and some trivial mentions in media-reports about his being part of a research group (fails
267: 178: 123: 1405: 341: 752: 655: 367: 255: 248: 228: 1497: 1128: 57: 36: 115: 67: 334:
He has also appeared on panels in various news channels. There are articles dedicated to his views on
1483: 1367: 1349: 1311:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Notability (academics)#Notability Criterion 3 and the Indian Academy of Sciences
713: 271: 245: 214: 1341: 633: 289: 242: 1387: 1151: 1116: 1079: 1019: 993: 581:, can you give an example of a worse-written article that we are actively allowing to stay in WP? 911: 402: 962:
following the block notice, it is clear that there is an ongoing issue between these editors.
194: 75: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1496:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1471: 1380: 1337: 1282: 1270:
of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g.,
1253: 1227: 1104: 1071: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
1458: 1318: 1298: 1202: 1174: 1156: 1142: 967: 53: 1475: 1443: 1231: 1230:
say only Fellows are notable it says members are notable and he was a member.Further meets
1194: 1083: 629: 596: 398: 238: 1479: 1363: 1345: 1163:), and on the interactions of proteins encoded by the phthiocerol dimycocerosate locus of 1058: 951: 295:
I further note that he has given an interview to RepublicTv (FoxNews of India) and was
1189:
and PLoS / PLoS One but none with substantial citations. One page I saw indicated an
1146: 1263: 1040: 1015: 989: 955: 654:
So many academics publish papers in reputable journals and you might wish to see our
545: 590:
over here (in a off-wiki sense) and I have no enmity with either you or the subject.
1120: 946: 862: 709: 437: 331: 1219: 1112: 153: 1395: 614:
None of the awards received by him are any revered by the professional community
1454: 1314: 1294: 1215: 1198: 1124: 963: 801: 734: 1178: 1054: 717: 496:
draft or for deletion, but will delete this because you have an axe to grind.
562: 1223: 1160: 782:
And being a speaker at ORF; does not contribute to notability, either.
1267: 1222:
and there are 66 current associates it is very prestigious in India.
1039:- Nothing there to warrant a standalone article on Knowledge (XXG). 1218:
There have only been 346 associates since it was founded in 1934.
1492:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
751:
You need to read the stuff that's being thrown at you. Reading
1313:. Any and all contributions to that discussion are welcome. 804:
and the next section too. I can add a host of other sources.
1011:
list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
958:
following the above personal attack. Given the response to
1442:) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this 1390:
His work has also received significant coverage in media.
457:, none of those awards remotely confer any notability. 149: 145: 141: 213: 897:
There are many admins who would be willing to wield
865:
enjoy your patronage. Slow claps for your hypocrisy.
628:
And, you can nominate any article of your choice at
227: 258:), born to a may-be-notable chemist, (which fails 1152:PROTEINS: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 254:AFAIS, he is an associate professor (which fails 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 1504:). No further edits should be made to this page. 1009:Note: This discussion has been included in the 983:Note: This discussion has been included in the 237:I cannot understand about how this person meets 1388:Anand's profile at Indian Academy of Sciences. 403:argument to avoid in discussions such as these 1149:) and on its crystal structure (published in 1135:aspartate decarboxylase enzyme (published in 262:) who is incidentally also a run-of-the-mill 8: 1309:As promised, I have started a discussion at 107:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! 1336:. I don't think notability can be found in 942:Note for contributors and the closing admin 1403: 1008: 985:list of India-related deletion discussions 982: 339: 1131:. I can find work on characterising the 510:Looks like you guys don't learn from the 266:columnist over news-portals (which fails 716:. He has also appeared as a panelist in 251:subject-specific-notability guidelines. 1257: 1236:2402:3A80:454:94F1:C594:3D83:F8D4:6B30 899:Special:Block/IndianHistoryEnthusiast 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 1362:No concrete evidence of notability. 1138:Protein Expression and Purification 1088:2402:3A80:474:ED80:D9FB:7AD4:C9F7:5 24: 618:at the topmost tier of the field. 1224:Current Associates 66 Associates 1220:Former Associates 346 Associates 1080:Indian Academy of Sciences Anand 92:Introduction to deletion process 1170:Molecular Genetics and Genomics 901:for the above personal attack. 700:What about interview given to 544:Adding his paper published in 297:an invited guest at a lit-fest 1: 1379:Meets the criteria No. 3 for 1147:10.1016/S1046-5928(02)00039-6 714:Observer Research Foundation. 239:general notability guidelines 1463:16:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC) 1422:16:09, 28 January 2019 (UTC) 1372:17:16, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1354:04:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1323:03:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1303:02:36, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1260:National Academy of Sciences 1244:02:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1207:02:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1096:00:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 1063:22:49, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 1046:13:58, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 1029:13:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 1003:13:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 972:02:10, 24 January 2019 (UTC) 933:16:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 875:15:32, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 818:15:17, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 796:15:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 778:15:12, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 747:14:42, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 729:14:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 672:14:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 650:14:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 595:You need to understand that 574:14:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 557:14:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 540:14:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 523:14:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 506:14:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 471:13:55, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 450:13:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 426:13:37, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 384:13:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 358:13:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 324:13:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 62:03:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC) 399:what other articles are ike 82:(AfD)? Read these primers! 1521: 1470:. Notability not found in 1278:Indian Academy of Sciences 1165:Mycobacterium tuberculosis 1133:Mycobacterium tuberculosis 1109:Indian Academy of Sciences 1076:Indian Academy of Sciences 1074:has been a member of the 336:mainstream media platforms 1179:10.1007/s00438-004-1088-3 527:Just going to leave this 1494:Please do not modify it. 1183:more recent publications 397:all things being equal, 32:Please do not modify it. 1432:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 1410:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 947:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 867:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 739:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 721:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 579:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 566:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 549:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 532:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 515:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 498:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 455:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 442:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 393:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 364:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 346:IndianHistoryEnthusiast 1185:in journals including 440:, confirming the same. 1428:Note to closing admin 1340:and not in #3: maybe 1129:tuberculosis vaccines 802:Republic_TV#Criticism 80:Articles for deletion 710:World Economic Forum 438:world economic forum 332:World Economic Forum 1392:Brookings Institute 1252:IP, criterion 3 of 1107:criterion 3 as the 858:Brookings Institute 1272:Fellow of the IEEE 1161:10.1002/prot.21126 1111:membership was an 656:relevant criterion 305:right-wing thinker 1447: 1424: 1408:comment added by 1031: 1005: 360: 344:comment added by 116:Anand Ranganathan 97:Guide to deletion 87:How to contribute 68:Anand Ranganathan 1512: 1425: 1103:: Does not pass 1043: 1027: 1001: 949: 928: 923: 813: 808: 791: 786: 773: 768: 718:ORF discussions. 667: 662: 645: 640: 632:after following 466: 461: 423: 418: 411: 396: 379: 374: 319: 314: 301:trivial mentions 232: 231: 217: 169: 157: 139: 77: 34: 1520: 1519: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1502:deletion review 1402:among others. 1041: 1014: 988: 945: 924: 921: 809: 806: 787: 784: 769: 766: 663: 660: 641: 638: 512:press coverage. 462: 459: 421: 414: 407: 390: 375: 372: 315: 312: 307:but that's it. 260:WP:NOTINHERITED 174: 165: 130: 114: 111: 74: 71: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1518: 1516: 1507: 1506: 1488: 1487: 1465: 1448: 1374: 1357: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1306: 1305: 1247: 1246: 1210: 1209: 1181:). There are 1167:(published in 1115:position from 1098: 1065: 1048: 1033: 1032: 1006: 980: 979: 978: 977: 976: 975: 974: 917: 915: 904: 902: 895: 894: 893: 892: 891: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 884: 883: 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 798: 780: 731: 685: 684: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 652: 626: 624: 621: 619: 612: 610: 607: 605: 593: 591: 584: 582: 559: 542: 525: 508: 493: 480: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 473: 429: 428: 388: 387: 386: 268:WP:NJOURNALIST 235: 234: 171: 110: 109: 104: 94: 89: 72: 70: 65: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1517: 1505: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1490: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1466: 1464: 1460: 1456: 1452: 1449: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1423: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1375: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1358: 1355: 1351: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1335: 1332: 1331: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1307: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1279: 1275: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1264:Royal Society 1261: 1255: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1245: 1241: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1192: 1188: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1171: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1153: 1148: 1144: 1140: 1139: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1113:Associateship 1110: 1106: 1102: 1099: 1097: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1077: 1073: 1069: 1066: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1052: 1049: 1047: 1044: 1038: 1035: 1034: 1030: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1012: 1007: 1004: 999: 995: 991: 986: 981: 973: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 948: 943: 940: 939: 938: 937: 936: 935: 934: 931: 929: 927: 918: 916: 913: 909: 905: 903: 900: 896: 876: 872: 868: 864: 859: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 850: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 842: 841: 840: 839: 838: 837: 836: 819: 816: 814: 812: 803: 799: 797: 794: 792: 790: 781: 779: 776: 774: 772: 762: 758: 754: 750: 749: 748: 744: 740: 736: 732: 730: 726: 722: 719: 715: 711: 707: 703: 699: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 673: 670: 668: 666: 657: 653: 651: 648: 646: 644: 635: 631: 627: 625: 622: 620: 617: 613: 611: 608: 606: 602: 598: 594: 592: 589: 585: 583: 580: 577: 576: 575: 571: 567: 564: 560: 558: 554: 550: 547: 543: 541: 537: 533: 530: 526: 524: 520: 516: 513: 509: 507: 503: 499: 494: 490: 489: 488: 487: 486: 485: 484: 483: 482: 481: 472: 469: 467: 465: 456: 453: 452: 451: 447: 443: 439: 435: 434: 433: 432: 431: 430: 427: 424: 419: 417: 412: 410: 405:. Just FYII. 404: 400: 394: 389: 385: 382: 380: 378: 369: 365: 362: 361: 359: 355: 351: 347: 343: 337: 333: 328: 327: 326: 325: 322: 320: 318: 308: 306: 302: 298: 293: 291: 287: 283: 280: 277: 273: 269: 265: 261: 257: 252: 250: 247: 244: 240: 230: 226: 223: 220: 216: 212: 208: 205: 202: 199: 196: 193: 190: 187: 184: 180: 177: 176:Find sources: 172: 168: 164: 161: 155: 151: 147: 143: 138: 134: 129: 125: 121: 117: 113: 112: 108: 105: 102: 98: 95: 93: 90: 88: 85: 84: 83: 81: 76: 69: 66: 64: 63: 59: 55: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 1493: 1491: 1467: 1450: 1427: 1404:— Preceding 1383: 1376: 1359: 1333: 1290: 1286: 1190: 1186: 1168: 1164: 1150: 1136: 1132: 1121:tuberculosis 1117:2002 to 2006 1100: 1067: 1050: 1036: 954:for 48 h by 941: 925: 907: 810: 788: 770: 760: 756: 753:WP:INTERVIEW 664: 642: 615: 600: 587: 463: 416:SerialNumber 415: 408: 376: 368:WP:INTERVIEW 340:— Preceding 316: 309: 294: 285: 263: 256:WP:NACADEMIC 253: 236: 224: 218: 210: 203: 197: 191: 185: 175: 162: 73: 49: 47: 31: 28: 1125:BCG vaccine 735:Republic TV 706:Republic TV 601:significant 201:free images 54:Ad Orientem 1480:Xxanthippe 1396:NewsMinute 1364:Capitals00 1346:Xxanthippe 759:review of 338:as well. 272:WP:NAUTHOR 264:journalist 1498:talk page 1400:The Hindu 1342:WP:Author 1287:potential 1173:in 2004, 1155:in 2006, 1141:in 2002, 950:has been 702:The Hindu 634:WP:BEFORE 290:WP:SIGCOV 274:; I spot 37:talk page 1500:or in a 1440:contribs 1418:contribs 1406:unsigned 1256:states: 1051:Question 1042:FitIndia 1024:contribs 1016:Eastmain 998:contribs 990:Eastmain 956:Bishonen 912:WP:BLP1E 563:this one 354:contribs 342:unsigned 160:View log 101:glossary 39:or in a 1472:WP:Prof 1381:WP:Prof 1338:WP:Prof 1283:WP:PROF 1266:) or a 1262:or the 1254:WP:PROF 1228:WP:PROF 1105:WP:PROF 1072:WP:PROF 1070:passes 952:blocked 944:: FYI, 908:heavily 586:I know 546:nature. 282:reviews 207:WP refs 195:scholar 133:protect 128:history 78:New to 1476:WP:GNG 1468:Delete 1455:Sitush 1451:Delete 1360:Delete 1315:EdChem 1295:EdChem 1291:likely 1268:fellow 1232:WP:GNG 1216:EdChem 1199:EdChem 1195:WP:GNG 1187:Nature 1101:Delete 1084:WP:GNG 1037:Delete 964:EdChem 757:single 630:WP:AFD 604:favor. 599:seeks 597:WP:GNG 401:is an 299:. Has 179:Google 137:delete 50:delete 1055:Hoary 800:Read 561:Also 529:here. 422:54129 303:as a 222:JSTOR 183:books 167:Stats 154:views 146:watch 142:links 16:< 1484:talk 1459:talk 1436:talk 1414:talk 1377:Keep 1368:talk 1350:talk 1319:talk 1299:talk 1276:The 1240:talk 1203:talk 1092:talk 1082:and 1068:Keep 1059:talk 1020:talk 994:talk 968:talk 871:talk 863:this 743:talk 725:talk 712:and 704:and 588:none 570:talk 553:talk 536:talk 519:talk 502:talk 446:talk 350:talk 292:). 215:FENS 189:news 150:logs 124:talk 120:edit 58:talk 1474:or 1444:AfD 1289:or 1175:doi 1157:doi 1143:doi 1127:or 1123:or 960:WBG 926:WBG 811:WBG 789:WBG 771:WBG 665:WBG 643:WBG 464:WBG 377:WBG 317:WBG 284:of 279:few 249:our 243:any 241:or 229:TWL 158:– ( 1486:). 1478:. 1461:) 1446:. 1438:• 1430:: 1426:— 1420:) 1416:• 1398:, 1394:, 1370:) 1352:) 1344:? 1321:) 1301:) 1274:). 1242:) 1205:) 1094:) 1061:) 1022:• 1013:. 996:• 987:. 970:) 873:) 745:) 727:) 636:. 616:or 572:) 555:) 538:) 521:) 504:) 448:) 409:—— 370:. 356:) 352:• 246:of 209:) 152:| 148:| 144:| 140:| 135:| 131:| 126:| 122:| 60:) 1482:( 1457:( 1434:( 1412:( 1366:( 1356:. 1348:( 1334:? 1317:( 1297:( 1238:( 1234:. 1201:( 1191:h 1177:: 1159:: 1145:: 1090:( 1086:. 1057:( 1026:) 1018:( 1000:) 992:( 966:( 922:∯ 869:( 807:∯ 785:∯ 767:∯ 761:2 741:( 723:( 661:∯ 658:. 639:∯ 568:( 551:( 534:( 517:( 500:( 460:∯ 444:( 395:: 391:@ 373:∯ 348:( 313:∯ 286:a 276:a 233:) 225:· 219:· 211:· 204:· 198:· 192:· 186:· 181:( 173:( 170:) 163:· 156:) 118:( 103:) 99:( 56:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Ad Orientem
talk
03:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Anand Ranganathan

Articles for deletion
How to contribute
Introduction to deletion process
Guide to deletion
glossary
Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
Anand Ranganathan
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.