Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nirman Dave

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 19:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nirman Dave

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

Non-notable computer programmer and founder/CEO of an unremarkable (start-up?) company. Article subject has not received significant coverage; some of the article's sources are not reliable/independent of the subject, such as SourceNet, his "company", and Movzio, a "blogging site". Randor1980 (talk | contributions) 13:08, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Article seems more like a quasi-Facebook bio than an encyclopedic article. Sources presented are dubious and unreliable, which indicates the subject is not notable. Kindzmarauli (talk) 14:25, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete - Article seems to be of notability as the work done by the 18 year old chap is remarkable and should be kept on wikipedia for people to know more about the same and be inspired. Although the company mentioned: SourceNet is unknown, the projects mentioned are extremely remarkable. While "Movzio" seems like a blogging site, other references mentioned should also be taken into consideration as they are not "blogging" sites, such as YourStory. Hence, the article should not be deleted. Nirman Dave has made his own programming language at the age of 17 years. When do you see such people everyday? It is highly preferred that this article should not be deleted. Kentmathamlin (talk) 14:33, 11 August 2014 (UTC) — Kentmathamlin (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete - Person seems a self proclaimed programmer. No notable sources. YourStory is not a reliable source. All other sources presented are dubious and unreliable, and are in a form of interviews and generated by the subject himself which indicates the subject is not notable. SmackoVector (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources given are not reliable or independent. 331dot (talk) 20:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no evidence of any notability .–Davey2010 • (talk) 03:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete - This 18 year old has done great work. He is very well known and should be considered and not deleted. Blackbaby123 (talk) 12:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC) — Blackbaby123 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete Fails WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:V, WP:GNG, and WP:RS. What 'great work' has he done? Well known? Seriously? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:BIO as well as it seems to be the case of WP:COI since the image used in the infobox is owned by the uploader i.e. the contributor of the article. CutestPenguin • Talk 13:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand your point about the COI and the image. Could you be a bit clearer? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 19:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Rsrikanth05: The image used in the infobox under the same articles is uploaded by the contributer who is claiming to be the owner of the image File:NirmanDave.jpg and it appears that the user created the account for single purpose. CutestPenguin • Talk 14:15, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, okay. I agree, the account seems to be a single purpose one, but the COI image argument doesn't hold good. The account may be an acquaintance of the subject. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Likely self-promotion. The SPAs arguing that he is "very well known" are not very convincing. It's too soon for an article on this guy. Once he gets some legitimate coverage in reliable sources, we can write an article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:17, 15 August 2014 (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.