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 keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 03:46, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Manu Sharma

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Manu Sharma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An IP request from the talk page (page is semi'd)

Manu Sharma is not a notable person. He was involved in a criminal case. Neither he is a great personality nor he is the owner of any big firm or organization. He is just a layman who murdered a lady for which he has already been punished. Then on what basis his Wikipedia page has been created online. There are many criminals exists then why only his page has been created. Wikipedia should give equal importance to everyone. If anybody can put information on Wikipedia then anybody's Wikipedia page can also be made over here. There must be some rules and regulations that Wikipedia must follow. Everyone knows that Manu Sharma is not at all a popular person although he is just a criminal and by posting his information like this online we are indirectly promoting him. Who knew Manu Sharma before no one but if such information or pages will be made online then everyone will get to know about that yes Manu Sharma might be a a very popular personality. I don't think that there is any use of promoting this page anymore. Here, on this page the Jessica Lal's murder case information has been mentioned so the page must be of Jessica Lal Murder case rather than of Manu Sharma. Being a normal user of Wikipedia its my duty to report the issue that we all face and analyzes by seeing this page. If you think this page must be there online then please give me some genuine and solid reasons that ye this page must be present online and its really very beneficial for folks. Also, please if you can then prove me that the page has not been created for the promotional purpose. And if possible please remove this page

Two previous AfDs came to no consensus; the request to merge/redirect to Murder of Jessica Lal per WP:BLP1E is reasonable enough that I brought it here; but this is a bit procedural; I myself am neutral WilyD 11:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On a side note, I'd say, -Wikipedia community is wasting time to have this deletion discussion here. It is most probably requested by a sock-puppeter (User:Akshwjas), which is very much related to Venod Sharma, father of "Manu Sharma". His problem is, when people Google Venod Sharma, Manu Sharma page shows up in search results, and it some unknown way affects Venod Sharma personality. He tried very much to remove the father Venod Sharma name from present article using "edit semi-protected" requests on talk page, what is reliably sourced and is just basic biographical detail (See, Talk:Manu Sharma). Now as his previous edit-request on talk page was reverted by some Wikipedia editor, he is here to engage us in an unnecessary deletion discussion. And it is all just because, there is about to happen a states assembly election sometime, in the end of the year.
I'd argue User:WilyD to withdraw the nomination to save the community time. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 06:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A proper discussion of a BLP that's twice been closed as no consensus is never a waste of time, and it's perposterous to suggest otherwise. Yeah, there's a long timespan of coverage, but it looks like it's all about his role as a killer, rather than a biography of him, and the content is very similar to Murder of Jessica Lal; it's very reasonable to suggest it's a BLP1E case. I'm not convinced it's not the proper outcome. WilyD 07:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do understand your stand here, as you say in nomination, you are neutral and it is a bit procedural. And, you also wonder at the same time, if it falls under BLP1E and a redirect to the event Murder of Jessica Lal page would be more constructive approach. If BLP1E is the only concern, I'd love the cite the same guideline here to avoid confusion, if there's any:
BLP1E says, "We should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:"
1. - If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. - He was covered out of the single event, as when he was granted parole, he was covered in multiple independent reliable sources as such, The Hindu, The Hindu-2, Times of India. --Other out of event coverage, --Times of India (9 years later of the event), Times of India-2. He has been in news coverage one and half decade later in 2014, since the event occurred in 1999, NDTV significant coverage. And, similarly there are many, it was covered by almost all national news papers and tv channels, The Hindu, Economic Times, Times of India, IBN live, Zee news. Last coverage of the subject was only a month ago, 1. He gets coverage, when he comes out on parole and even when goes back to the jail (1).
2. -If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article. --->Certainly not. He is son of Venod Sharma and brother of Kartikeya Sharma. He is subjected to news coverage every time something he does, irrespective of good or bad. Not really very likely to be a low-profile individual.
3. - If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley, Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented. --->Event was much significant that, a movie, No One Killed Jessica was made, and even it turned out to have significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that it has its own article. More than just enough substantial coverage and the subject was just well covered in the reliable sources that, Manu Sharma was a good article at one time. Manu Sharma has received persistent coverage, -[1 coverage of a month ago].
Do you still believe, it is a candidate of WP:BLP1E. If yes, I would choose to not argue any more and will leave it on community to have it run all 7 or 14 days, to achieve a consensus through the deletion discussion here. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 08:54, 21 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.
More