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 of the debate was keep and de-POV. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 19:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was up for Speedy deletion, but I'm not entirely convinced, although parts of the article are totally irrelevant, some parts hint toward some notability, so I'm letting AFD decide on this matter. -Obli (Talk)^? 16:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and de-POV - guy seems notable in his country. There've been a number of AfD's lately that involve the Indian tech sector, and I've been consistently voting "keep" - it's a growing area of particular interest to the class of Indians who might use English-language wikipedia. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 16:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep, apparently notable for the sum of his activities. But I disagree with the apparent notion of Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. that we ought to have "affirmative action" for certain types of articles. Let's hold everybody to the same standard of notability, please. Sandstein 18:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep and clean-up -- I agree with Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr.. I think it is important that this article stays, but gets cleaned up to meet Wikipedia standards. I have tried helping cleaning up, but am getting harassed in exchange by Atul Chitnis, something I ought to have anticipated ... Therefore, this is the last edit/comment I'm making on this article. Cheers. Zaatar 18:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and de-POV - As Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. says, the man is notable. He's been around for years in the BBS and linux communities in India. But the controversies mentioned are also very much there, and large parts of the original article, about his exit from the linux-india mailing lists, the winding down of the bangalore linux user group and the background of the bang!linux and foss.in conferences, were presented with a strong skew towards the person's PoV. The edits you see are the other side of the controversy. De-PoV'ing may not be easy - the various debates, email threads etc that have been linked to are spread over a period of several years.
• Keep and de-POV/Rewrite - The Person is notable, but the fact that some of the content has been taken from his website may make it difficult to de-POV it. I suggest a rewrite from scratch or at least remove the POV items as a start. Sid Carter 04:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above --Masssiveego 08:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• If no de-POV/Rewrite, delete -- a simple reading shows entire sentences which are simply POV. Thenothing 13:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• There is additional discussion in the Cleanup Task Force page for this article. Please refer to it too. Jace 18:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a voting page, not a campaign page. Stick to the rules, please. Achitnis 19:45, 19 March 2006 (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.