Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/B.R.K Raju

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B.R.K Raju

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

Delete. Poorly sourced BLP. Only references are primary. Subject does not meet WP:PROF or WP:POLITICIAN. Lacks in-depth coverage in reliable and independent sources. Cind.amuse 10:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, spam. Abductive (reasoning) 14:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)d[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG and there are COI issues involved. The article creator is the subject's son. He has created an article on his father before and it was earlier either through prod or AfD. (can an admin confirm this - should be available in his deleted contributions)?.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The deleted version was created at B.R.K.Raju (with no space) and later moved to B.R.K. Raju (with a period after the final initial unlike the present article). It lasted for about a year, from May 2009 to May 2010, but then was prodded as being an unsourced BLP and deleted for that reason. Since it was deleted by prod rather than by discussion, we can't use the fact that it was recreated after deletion as a reason for a WP:CSD#G4 speedy deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2011 (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.