The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Jatin Wahane

[edit]

Submission declined 4 times and still no evidence of notability. Let's take this out of its misery and stop wasting time. Delete. Randykitty (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete enough is enough. Legacypac (talk) 21:09, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Has the submitter been asked about conflict of interest? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Bleaahh. Enough is enough. No solid evidence of notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:31, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I don’t think this so fails notability (independent secondary sources, has been noticed), as it fails reliable verifiability of the claims made in the content. “Reliable” is a poorly applicable adjective to “secondary source” as a secondary source needs only reliably reveal the opinion of its author. I think the others above are wrong with the use of “notability”, but correct in saying it should be deleted. Delete as failing WP:V on too much of the extraordinary claims. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 15:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I just can't say how much I laughed at this page while reading it. Delete is not the question here, it should be deleted with no delay. Denver| Thank you (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2018 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.