Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vikas Singal

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. ✗plicit 14:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vikas Singal

[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)

completely non-notable vanity spam sourced to black-hat SEO and sponsored pieces/PR. PRAXIDICAE🌈 13:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can suggest edits that can improve the article, i think it's better than just deleting it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddyug (talk • contribs) 14:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I could, but there is nothing to improve because he isn't notable and you also don't listen. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — a promo piece citing as its sources... more promo pieces. No indication of notability; fails WP:GNG with flying colours. Could even be A7 and/or G11 speediable. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non notable. Fails our notability criteria. --Baggaet (talk) 14:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom fails WP:GNG a promo piece.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:GNG. Though more references can be added.STEWEART (talk) 21:00, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The words Entrepreneur, SEO Consultant and Digital Marketing Strategist are almost sufficient to condemn this to deletion. The references(!) achieve that. The blocking of the creating editor for UPE is unsurprising. WP:ADMASQ and fails WP:BIO 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:33, 2 July 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.