Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanathdeva Murutenge

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sanathdeva Murutenge

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

Blatant promotion of The internationally known Philosopher, Theoretical High-Energy Astrophysicist, Cosmologist, Cognitive Scientist and System Theorist. No independent references, just own website Staszek Lem (talk) 21:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no reliable independent sources provided establishing notability.Fails WP:GNG. Dan arndt (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I cannot find evidence of significant coverage by independent, reliable sources as required by WP:N. I concur with the nominator's assessment of this article as a blatant promotion. Astro4686 (talk) 03:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. His website is the only source given. I agree, it appears as blatant promotion. JimRenge (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Theoretical physics is a high-citation field, so the people notable in that field generally have many highly-cited publications listed in Google scholar. Murutenge has none. So WP:PROF is out of the question, and I see no other claim of notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - seems to be your average crank, albeit one with a medical degree. This could almost have been speedied. Blythwood (talk) 01:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No coverage. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:34, 28 February 2016 (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.