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

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. Bishonen | tålk 18:19, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tuhin Sinha[edit]

If you came here because of Tuhin Sinha's twitter posts, 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}}.

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is different to the version deleted at AfD, but the sourcing concerns remain as it is unclear that Sinha passes GNG/NAUTHOR/NPOLITICS or other relevant criteria when it comes to significant RS coverage. If deleted, would recommend SALT as this just closed and we don't need to do these monthly. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Star Mississippi 15:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (in this version) 4 out of 11 references are links to routine profile pages. Among others, one (news18) is a book excerpt, two (rediff, ToI) are explicit interviews. The two on BJP appointment are press releases (in the previous AfD, I'd noted that HuffPo had credited it to ANI, while Business Standard carried it as IANS). The remaining two, on Birsa Munda book and 'Loyola College Alumnus', are routine book launch announcements with no significant coverage of the subject. Hemantha (talk) 04:19, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KeepThis page is here since 06-07 and covered by multiple RSEsKichupila (talk) 05:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC) — Kichupila (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete Most of the sources are unreliable. 2001:4455:364:A800:5DC:1FFF:D6C9:A8C7 (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment note that he is calling for Shirt58 to be doxxed in this tweet. What appalling behavior. wizzito | say hello! 00:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Paid sources, distributed by news agencies. References are unreliable. Angad.uday (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NAUTHOR and WP:NPOL. LibStar (talk) 23:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, doesn't meet WP:BASIC or any SNGs. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 02:50, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not outright notable. The appalling behavior by this person on social media does not help in gaining notability. Agletarang (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. The subject doesn't pass the notability guidelines as an author per WP:AUTHOR. It aslo fails WP:POLITICIAN. Besides, the content in the page seems to be promotional in nature. _signed,511KeV ^(talk) 18:05, 28 March 2022 (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.