Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Deepak Narayan Amarapurkar

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. Jujutacular (talk) 03:24, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Deepak Narayan Amarapurkar

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

Seems to fail

WP:GNG. Dating of maintenance templates gives suspicion of an earlier removed version of this article. Non-relevant prizes that give no notability. A quick Google test revealed just 378 (effectively 42) hits, what is no indication of a well known man. Google Scholar stops at 6 hits...The Banner talk 19:56, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The weirdly dated maintenance tags seem to come from the page Vipulroy Rathod, which was used as a template for Dr. Deepak Narayan Amarapurkar, as far as I can tell from the page history. - HyperGaruda (talk) 03:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is a lack of coverage in reliable sources in this article. I also did a search but couldn't find any to add. The sources that are currently used do provide some verification of facts but those included are either self-published, examples of his own published research or primary sources related to his professional activities. Notability has not been established. Drchriswilliams (talk) 06:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and yet another overly promotionaly article on a non-notable medical doctor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Completely non-notable. Engleham (talk) 11:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Hello Wikipedians, thanks for your time! It was my first attempt at publishing on Wikipedia and it would be really disheartening to watch it being deleted. I would be obliged if instead of just pointing out the faults, you might consider editing and removing irrelevant points. Also, I had used the template of another Doctor for reference since I didn't have much idea on how to proceed, but I have rectified it and sincerely hope that the issue is resolved. Please point out an other discrepancies and let me know which points are irrelevant to the cause of Wikipedia so that I may continue contributing further. Makemelive (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
notability" as a guide for this. The editors here feel that Dr. Amarapurkar does not meet that standard. As you can imagine, one could write a similar article for millions of other professionals. Such a set of articles would quickly become unwieldy and Wikipedia's quality would wane. I would suggest looking at the links on your talk page for good ways to work on Wikipedia. Hope this helps. Jujutacular (talk) 03:23, 30 July 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.