Talk:Ishita Malaviya

Non-notable, suggest speedy deletion

This person is completely non-notable. Her supposed claim to fame is that she is a female "professional" surfer from India. Meets speedy deletion criteria WP:A7. See also WP:SIGNIF for the two questions:

1. Is this article reasonably plausible? Ans: Yes.
2. If yes, would this cause a person to be notable? Ans: NO.

Further, there is the small matter that the bulk of this article was (until now) devoted to promoting her business interests — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.158.142 (talk) 06:03, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

I edited out what I felt was promotional text in this article and then placed a notice for speedy deletion as per my message above. User:Strike Eagle repeatedly reverted my work with no discussion and some attempt at bullying. I still AGF in Strike Eagle, but this decision cannot be his alone. I have suggested on his talk-page that he leave the deletion notice alone for 24 hours so that other people have a chance to assess notability.

Secondly, I am now placing the deletion notice on the un-edited version of the page, with the promotional material retained, since Strike Eagle seems to want to defend that content. This will also enable other users to take a considered view.

Thirdly, it just so happened that I was not logged in at this time. IPs are often dismissed as trolls and bullied out of Wikipedia before they can start properly contributing. This is bad for Wikipedia and needs to be curbed. While I can easily login, I just want to pursue this case as an IP to see the result. 59.182.158.142 (talk) 06:34, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi 59.182.158.142, I wanted to know why should this article be deleted.--Skr15081997 (talk) 07:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Wow, can you read? The messages before this are all about that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.179.218 (talk) 08:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

:::: I think this article clears WP:A7. Did you yourself read WP:SIGNIF? --Jyoti (talk) 08:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

It is futile to engage in discussion here because the IP here, who claims to have an account seems similar to one banned user who both Strike Eagle and I have had issues with before. The article clears WP:N, WP:V, WP:GNG and WP:BIO. As for advertising and promotion, your statement merely is insulting to me y stating that I know nothing about the policies and that I am assoiciated with the subject. I am not associated with the subject, I only created the article after reading an article in a magazine at a Coffee Day outlet. If you really want to see this deleted, bring it to AfD where views can be expressed, CSD is merely POV pushing. That's all. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:07, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

You read an article in some glossy magazine, about an Indian girl who goes surfing, and thought hey, here is a girl who deserves to be famous. That tells us a lot about your level of maturity. That same level is again evident in your jumping to identify me as someone who has been banned from Wikipedia!!! Do you think that is why I am using an IP?? I don't know who it is that you and your friend have had issues with; it definitely is not me. Further evidence of your maturity factor and blinding arrogance quotient is seen in your words: it is futile to engage in discussion -- why? because the guy trying to talk to you is a troll and contemptible low-life.

It is clearly "futile to engage in discussion" with someone like you, all things considered. Like, how to explain to you that going surfing does not constitute notability? The woman has never even won a prize. How to explain to you and your pal that every swimming school or beach-side beer kiosk or motor-boat joy-ride provider that features in a glossy or on a lifestyle TV channel is not notable and should not be promoted on WP? You have yourself cited WP:BIO, so read the contents: trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. Don't you think I knew this much when I identified A7 as the criteria for speedy deletion? This is not a case for AfD but for speedy deletion, an exemplary case. Therefore before you string out a series of WPs (WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:BIO) all essentially the same and some even pointing to the same pages, in an effort to intimidate someone, do take the trouble to read those pages beforehand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.179.218 (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

This is not a case for speedy deletion, it may very well get deleted at AfD, but that's for the deletion discussion to decide; A7 does not require notability, A7 just requires a claim of importance and that is evident within the article. —SpacemanSpiff 10:27, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

INTIMIDATION MY FOOT. I know the damn policies that I have listed and as stated by MORE THAN ONE PERSON ABOVE, this is pretty much notable as of now. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

No such thing has been said about notability, only that it passes A7 criteria. Temper your language please. —SpacemanSpiff 15:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

What about those slanderous accusations being made against me? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:01, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Notability

Why is this topic not notable? Please answer this question. A female surfer from India, reported by more than one news source [including a non Indian one], places her as the country's first. Apart from this, there are other things that support the article thru WP:GNG. I have stated earlier, I HAVE NO CONNECTION WITH THE SUBJECT. All the nonssense of glossy paged magazine, beer whatever is pointless here. Links exist. If the article is not notable with the sources, all articles backed up with sources from The Guardian, The Hindu MUST BE DELETED by this logic. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:34, 20 June 2014 (UTC)