Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ananth Prabhu Gurpur

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Going with keep based on the work and arguments presented by User:Beccaynr and User:Nomadicghumakkad. Missvain (talk) 23:17, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ananth Prabhu Gurpur

[edit]

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

Ananth Prabhu Gurpur (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Fails WP:NAUTHOR GermanKity (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Nominator is correct when they say it doesn't qualify for WP:Author. Truly it doesn't. But it qualifies for WP:BASIC sufficiently. For example, India Today [1], The Hindu [2], [3], Times of India [4]. They have sufficient material to contribute to WP:BASIC. There is also a lot of print coverage over the website of the subject that was brought to my notice by the creator [5] that helps establish WP:BASIC. I had also initially rejected the article and didn't take it seriously. I only took it seriously when I saw the coverage of receiving grant from the state government to establish a center of excellence [6] where he is a PI. Hence, cleaned and accepted it. I have myself lost many debates to Beccaynr over WP:BASIC and understood it after a lot of struggle so I don't blame the nominator here. We all learn. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 09:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Bosh. "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." The coverage presented is press conferences, awareness campaign promotion involving the subject but NOT "intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" - and I would not call this significant coverage by any means. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC alike. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's no way someone could tell that there's no published secondary sources available sitting may be in another corner of the world. The person this article mentions is a very famous and is dear to the people of Dakshina Kannada and Karnataka, India. Lot of coverages has been given in many news and publishing about his work and contribution. He is a regular speaker at the Information Security Education and Awareness (ISEA) portal of the Government of India and the only speaker garnering a participation of thousands of netizens. His verified Facebook page is Dr. Ananth Prabhu Gurpur. 30 unsung heroes of India https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/anniversary-issue/story/20191230-cyber-sentry-1629809-2019-12-23 — Yato15 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 12:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment None of the sources given here are:
Self Published
written by someone Closely affiliated with subject
Primary

And, people who are writing them seem to have no vested interest (Financial or legal leverage). Hence, they are independent by definition. The sources talk about different events. For example, TOI article talks about Cybersafe Girl, The Hindu article talks about the grant, Deccan herrald talks about SOS Blood service, India Today talks about training on cyber security. Hence, they are intellectually independent of each other. Good to note that two TOI articles are written by two different journalists which implies there is no affiliation. Sources seem to be written by in-house team which has no vested interest with the subject or his work and hence independent of subject. The next point in WP:BASIC right below is if the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. Almost all sources talk about him and his work in 2 paragraphs even if we subtract what the subject is saying in double quotes which is enough for WP:BASIC. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any resources that justify the notability of an author. Can you please provide WP:THREE. GermanKity (talk)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep More news that came in diffrnt print newspapers below:
This Teacher takes online classes and distributes mask and tea to the needy, The Times Group
Are you cybersafe, girl? November 11, 2019, The Hindu
ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಂಗ ಅಕಾಡೆಮಿ ಆಯೋಜಿಸಿದ್ದ ಚಿತ್ರದುರ್ಗದಲ್ಲಿ ನ್ಯಾಯಾಂಗ, ಪೊಲೀಸ್ ಮತ್ತು ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ಅಭಿಯೋಜಕರಿಗೆ ಸೈಬರ್ ಭದ್ರತಾ ತರಬೇತಿ
Infotoon spread a good word on cyber safe girls, The Times Group
ಕೋವಿಡ್ ಸಮಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಆತ್ಮವಿಶ್ವಾಸದಿಂದ ಪರೀಕ್ಷೆಗಳನ್ನು ಹೇಗೆ ಎದುರಿಸುವುದು
Professor with a remarkable vision, Mangalore today, October 2018
Need Blood? Help is an SMS Away, Times City
ಪ್ರಜವಾಣಿ ಆಯೋಜಿಸಿರುವ ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕರ ಸೈಬರ್ ಅಪರಾಧ ಮತ್ತು ಭದ್ರತಾ ಸಮಸ್ಯೆಗಳನ್ನು ಪರಿಹರಿಸಲು ಲೈವ್ ಫೋನ್-ಇನ್ ಕಾರ್ಯಕ್ರಮ
Waseem0088 (talk) 04:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This Keep Vote by the creator. GermanKity (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Self published resources are not allowed need more references with WP:SIGCOV and WP:CORPDEPTH. GermanKity (talk) 04:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 00:12, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:HEY because the article has been revised and had independent and reliable sources added, and per WP:BASIC, for his notability as a cybersecurity expert, and per WP:CREATIVE for at least one of his cybersecurity projects. To support WP:BASIC, there is a 2018 Mangalore Today interview that begins with a WP:SECONDARY description that includes "polymath" and "cybersecurity expert," as well as an overview of his educational and career background. There is also a 2019 India Today profile that also describes him as a cybersecurity expert and includes career information. He also appears in a variety of 2020 articles that describe and quote him as a cybersecurity expert, including the Deccan Herald and The Times of India 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Per WP:CREATIVE, he created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work, the Cyber Safe Girl e-book, which has been the primary subject of [...] multiple independent periodical articles, e.g. in The Hindu and The New Indian Express and has evolved into a larger website and campaign reported by The Times of India, and a related initiative reported by The Deccan Herald. There is additional coverage of his other projects, some of his other books and academic research in the article, but the sources listed in this comment seem sufficient to at least support WP:BASIC notability. Beccaynr (talk) 13:59, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment One user contacted me for removing the deletion tag from this article. Please check on my talk page. It seems like it is a case of COI. I can see on the history of the page where Spiderone and discospinster tried to move into draft and PROD.GermanKity (talk) 10:33, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

-Please don't delete this page Admins of Wikepedia. -Dr.Ananth Prabhu Gurupur is Highly Respected in India and is well known for his achievements in cyberfeild "All the facts posted on this page is true and there is much more about this polymath. Apart from the field of Cyber security, he has many books authored and international journals written to his credit". -If you say the reason for deletion is lack of resources to prove eligibility for Wikepedia please check his "Verified Facebook Account" https://m.facebook.com/educatorananth/ which definitely is more than enough proof to say he is a notable person ,Hope Wikepedia takes Facebook account for considering and prevent any vandelism . -Shravankumaruk (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2021 (IST) — Shravankumaruk (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

* Fairly possible that this might be true. The way creator had written this page with so much unsourced information, it can be possible. Have added a COI tag. They had also removed past declines I remember. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 17:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Changed because there is truly not enough evidence. There seems to be no connection with the creator and this new user who has arrived dramatically. The BLPPROD is when there are no sources. It doesn't concern with notability (since notability can be evaluated only after sources are provided) Once it was moved to draft, the creator moved it back to main space but then again had put it back to draft space themselves. They tried to improve the page and submit but probably didn't have enough experience to do so. I forgot to assume good faith here and hasted my opinion. Also, the message on nominator's talk page Can you please remove Deletion request and contact me through mail for confirmation or verification Ananth prabhu sir is sad to see his own page go far from him is random. It almost seems like someone is trying to orchestrate a COI scene out of revenge/hatred to cause damage. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 19:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per Beccaynr, Apart from all the valid sources shared above, sharing 2 more sources [[7], [8] also [9] where Chief Minster of UP released his book in which much is written about him but this 3rd source can't be considered due to missing date in the paper cutting. Its passing WP:GNG. New User Shravankumaruk understands where the deletion discussion is going, who nominated, knows how to ask help from Germankity, edit codes, act like innocent by highlighting 'twice' for Facebook page. Calling 'Sir' Ananth Prabhu(Junior & Senior), as per my understanding people might not show grief with junior until they have some emotional connection. 2 Conclusions, Shravankumaruk is a sock of someone and he actually knows Ananth personally because he shared his Facebook Url, an extra step. Sonofstar (talk) 07:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Leaning towards keep. But, happy to welcome other experienced editors thoughts.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:47, 3 June 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ananth_Prabhu_Gurpur&oldid=1027948485"