597:"When it comes to industry leaders / entrepreneurs their notability comes..." erm nope, the point of the notability guidelines is to try and work out what the world at large considers notable and then we cover that. We get that indication from the coverage received. If your view that the world was taking note of the individual as a result of the success... then they'd still actually show some interest in that person and write about that person. There are many industry leaders/entrepreneurs for which that has happened, the world find the person interesting and so newspapers etc. write about the individual. For those who don't it does suggest that the world may well be interested in the creation but not in the person. (The same is true in many areas authors + books - book gets lots of press, reviews etc. and all mention the author but no real interest in the author as a person, film producers vs films... etc.). Given the low participation in the debate if any of the new references are up to anything I'd be tempted to let this be relisted, but if your argument is solely that, which has been rejected in many xFD discussions, It would seem a pointless exercise. --
612:
This makes a lot of sense, however, to the point that sources should cover primarily the individual, a number of the source material referenced in the article was primarily about the individual and not about the company per se. I would suggest referencing the IdeaMensch, BNET, Mixergy and
Loyalty360
559:
I looked at those sources before deleting. They refer, as far as I could tell, to companies founded by
Dudelson - not with any significant coverage of Dudelson himself, beyond a "here's how I do business" interview. If it's desired, I can restore the article for the sources to be assessed by others
544:
Yes, the article contains a host of new articles from notable business news sources / publications like New York Times, Inc
Magazine, Bnet.com and others, that were not discussed at the AfD. The original page which was deleted was poorly presented and lacked notable sources, my intention with the
581:
Thank you
Bushranger, as mentioned before, the challenge here - and my argument of notability- is that one cannot separate the achievements of a company vs the individual when the individual was leading the company (and the source material credits the individual for leading the org).... When it
613:(byline article), as examples, which favor coverage about the individual over their creation. Although not on-line, i've seen this individual speak at a number of conferences about the general state of the loyalty industry and he is generally considered a thought leader.
640:. for which it will be easier to show the notability. CEOs of sufficiently major companies are i think notable but it would be difficult to maintain the proposition that all companies that merit a Knowledge (XXG) articles are sufficiently notable for that purpose.
186:
Although I was not contacted regarding this, I wouldn't have changed my decision anyway. I can't see how the AFD could be interpreted any different and I think the IP is misunderstanding what DRV is.--v/r -
461:
The article in question was a recreation of an article deleted by unanimous consensus at AfD, without any siginificant changes in the article's content vis-a-vis the version that was AfD'd. -
209:, pretty much rendering the earlier AFD discussion irrelevant. I'm assuming Mahan Mitra/Mahan Mj/Mahan Maharaj are different forms of the same name; the academic credentials seem to line up.
203:
680:
There is normally a problem with articles for people who have done several things, each of them somewhat under the level for notability. I don't really have any solution.
522:
Have any new sources emerged that weren't discussed at the AfD? I would think that new sources would be the best way forward if we're to have an article with this title.—
34:
426:
168:
Mahan Mj (Mahan Mitra) has got Shanti Swarup
Bhatnagar Award this year. He is one of the leading topologists in India. His page should be restored as soon as possible!
48:
43:
151:
294:
FWIW, I added articles this morning on the other recipients of the 2011 awards. There's a good deal of work still to be done for the earlier years.
207:
74:– Opriginal Close endorsed but new information means that this now merits an article so restored. Further relisting at editorial discretion. –
408:
39:
278:
169:
139:
535:
21:
598:
435:
214:
160:
706:
358:
318:
89:
17:
582:
comes to industry leaders / entrepreneurs their notability comes from the success of the organization they've created.
210:
202:. Without getting into all the ins-and-outs of the deletion process, it looks like the article subject indeed won
669:
565:
493:
466:
691:
675:
651:
622:
618:
606:
591:
587:
571:
554:
550:
539:
517:
499:
472:
452:
448:
347:
305:
286:
282:
271:
254:
237:
218:
194:
177:
173:
78:
378:
637:
343:– Deletion Endorsed as clearly no case has been made that the close or G4 deletions were incorrect. –
531:
485:
481:
420:
374:
339:
665:
602:
561:
489:
462:
614:
583:
546:
444:
657:
660:
has already been deleted five, count 'em five times. (three G11, one A7, one G7) and has been
267:
661:
545:
new article was to clean up previous editors article using these new and reliable sources.
191:
109:
523:
250:
687:
647:
633:
513:
301:
233:
344:
263:
245:
I think a discussion about this award might make sense, so no objection to an AfD.
226:
and add the new material. Obviously our checking was not sufficiently thorough.
75:
188:
105:
70:
628:
I would suggest trying to make first an article for his principal companies,
246:
682:
642:
508:
296:
228:
664:. It seems the article can never be made without being promotional... -
629:
505:
temporarily restored for discussion at
Deletion Review
415:
401:
393:
385:
146:
132:
124:
116:
488:. I've corrected the link above to reflect this. -
8:
357:The following is an archived debate of the
262:New award makes for sufficient notability.
88:The following is an archived debate of the
443:notable american executive / entrepreneur
332:
63:
204:the highest award for science in India
243:restore with no prejudice to a relist
7:
709:of the page listed in the heading.
321:of the page listed in the heading.
28:
560:without any problem though. :) -
459:Speedy-deleting admin's comment:
705:The above is an archive of the
317:The above is an archive of the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
540:19:16, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
500:16:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
473:16:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
453:16:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
178:23:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
1:
480:The page in question was at
692:22:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
676:04:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
652:00:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
623:15:02, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
607:15:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
592:15:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
572:02:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
555:02:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
518:23:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
348:04:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
306:20:44, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
287:21:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
272:17:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
255:01:01, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
238:22:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
219:04:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
195:01:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
79:04:36, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
732:
712:Please do not modify it.
364:Please do not modify it.
324:Please do not modify it.
260:restore/allow recreation
184:Deleting admin's comment
95:Please do not modify it.
40:Deletion review archives
211:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz
361:of the page above.
92:of the page above.
206:earlier this week
719:
718:
638:Music for Charity
538:
331:
330:
200:Allow recreation
59:30 September 2011
35:2011 September 29
723:
714:
672:
568:
530:
528:
496:
469:
438:
433:
418:
404:
396:
388:
366:
333:
326:
163:
158:
149:
135:
127:
119:
97:
64:
53:
33:
731:
730:
726:
725:
724:
722:
721:
720:
710:
707:deletion review
674:
670:
570:
566:
524:
498:
494:
471:
467:
434:
432:
429:
425:
414:
413:
407:
400:
399:
392:
391:
384:
383:
362:
359:deletion review
322:
319:deletion review
159:
157:
154:
145:
144:
138:
131:
130:
123:
122:
115:
114:
93:
90:deletion review
62:
55:
54:
51:
46:
37:
31:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
729:
727:
717:
716:
701:
700:
699:
698:
697:
696:
695:
694:
668:
666:The Bushranger
610:
609:
579:
578:
577:
576:
575:
574:
564:
562:The Bushranger
520:
502:
492:
490:The Bushranger
486:scott dudelson
482:Scott Dudelson
475:
465:
463:The Bushranger
441:
440:
430:
423:
411:
405:
397:
389:
381:
375:Scott Dudelson
369:
368:
353:
352:
351:
350:
340:Scott Dudelson
329:
328:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
277:Thanks a lot!
275:
274:
257:
240:
224:Speedy Restore
221:
197:
166:
165:
155:
142:
136:
128:
120:
112:
100:
99:
84:
83:
82:
81:
61:
56:
49:2011 October 1
47:
44:2011 September
38:
30:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
728:
715:
713:
708:
703:
702:
693:
689:
685:
684:
679:
678:
677:
673:
671:One ping only
667:
663:
659:
656:The catch is
655:
654:
653:
649:
645:
644:
639:
635:
634:Swagbucks.com
631:
627:
626:
625:
624:
620:
616:
615:StanleyJean05
608:
604:
600:
596:
595:
594:
593:
589:
585:
584:StanleyJean05
573:
569:
567:One ping only
563:
558:
557:
556:
552:
548:
547:StanleyJean05
543:
542:
541:
537:
533:
529:
527:
521:
519:
515:
511:
510:
506:
503:
501:
497:
495:One ping only
491:
487:
483:
479:
476:
474:
470:
468:One ping only
464:
460:
457:
456:
455:
454:
450:
446:
445:StanleyJean05
437:
428:
422:
417:
410:
403:
395:
387:
380:
376:
373:
372:
371:
370:
367:
365:
360:
355:
354:
349:
346:
342:
341:
337:
336:
335:
334:
327:
325:
320:
315:
314:
307:
303:
299:
298:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
284:
280:
273:
269:
265:
261:
258:
256:
252:
248:
244:
241:
239:
235:
231:
230:
225:
222:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
201:
198:
196:
193:
190:
185:
182:
181:
180:
179:
175:
171:
162:
153:
148:
141:
134:
126:
118:
111:
107:
104:
103:
102:
101:
98:
96:
91:
86:
85:
80:
77:
73:
72:
68:
67:
66:
65:
60:
57:
50:
45:
41:
36:
23:
19:
711:
704:
681:
641:
611:
580:
525:
507:
504:
477:
458:
442:
363:
356:
338:
323:
316:
295:
279:59.93.245.81
276:
259:
242:
227:
223:
199:
183:
170:59.93.247.38
167:
94:
87:
69:
58:
106:Mahan Mitra
71:Mahan Mitra
658:Swag bucks
526:S Marshall
599:82.19.4.7
20: |
632:,orand
630:Prodege
436:restore
421:article
394:history
345:Spartaz
264:JoshuaZ
161:restore
125:history
76:Spartaz
662:salted
484:, not
688:talk
648:talk
514:talk
478:NOTE:
416:watch
409:links
302:talk
247:Hobit
234:talk
147:watch
140:links
52:: -->
16:<
619:talk
603:talk
588:talk
551:talk
449:talk
402:logs
386:edit
379:talk
283:talk
268:talk
251:talk
215:talk
174:talk
133:logs
117:edit
110:talk
32:<
683:DGG
643:DGG
636:or
509:DGG
427:XfD
419:) (
297:DGG
229:DGG
152:XfD
150:) (
22:Log
690:)
650:)
621:)
605:)
590:)
553:)
516:)
451:)
304:)
285:)
270:)
253:)
236:)
217:)
176:)
42::
686:(
646:(
617:(
601:(
586:(
549:(
536:C
534:/
532:T
512:(
447:(
439:)
431:|
424:|
412:|
406:|
398:|
390:|
382:|
377:(
300:(
281:(
266:(
249:(
232:(
213:(
192:P
189:T
172:(
164:)
156:|
143:|
137:|
129:|
121:|
113:|
108:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.