Talk:Sandeep Unnikrishnan

----

Untitled

Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan is a war hero. The point of this article is not to record that he died, but to record the way he died. He died protecting the people of his country, and that deserves to be remembered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.166.145.19 (talk) 17:25, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The thing is that the article as it stands today is a biography of a perosn who may have been a hero and a great leader, and may deserve to be remembered, but it does not (in my own view) have sufficient reliable sources by Wikipedia's definition to be present. This is why I have proposed it for a consensus to be reached about its deletion or not. If you want your voice to be heard, and I hope you do, please make a sound argument with regard to policies for inclusion on that deletion discussion page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:39, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Expansion needed

A lot of coverage is expected for the Major Sandeep Unnikirshnan in the media. The article as it stands is little more than a news headline. It should be expanded in lines of a Biography of a notable person. The Afd discussion should be settled. This person is not a victim of the terror strike in Mumbai but an officer who laid his life in lines of duty. Indoresearch (talk) 14:29, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

That he died in an unpleasant manner or a brave manner doing his duty is not in dispute. But to be a valid article here there must be other notability than WP:BIO1E. All articles about people, however heroic, however awful their deaths, must still meet accepted criteria for notability. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

KEEP and Expand: Major Unnikrishnan should be added to other Casulaties of Indian Soldiers who died in combat. He is going to get a major medal from Indian government.

It is will shame to remove him. We need to keep a list of brave soldiers who have laid their life saving others and commoners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.17.233 (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Compare WP:BIO1E to the article of Todd Beamer, the American who said "Let's roll!" On UA Flight 93. I can't find any proposal for deletion based on his fame related to one single event, even if there were, his article remains. If an article of Todd Beamerqualifies, why not Major Sandeep Unnikirshnan? Especially when one might draw an early loose analogy between them and the respective terrorist attacks they were involved in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pengopen (talk • contribs) 12:48, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Please may I draw your attention to this topic. If you feel an article merits a consensus being reached on its deletion please feel wholly at liberty, as we all are, to nominate it. We reach consensus and articles are kept or deleted. It is not a terminal thing for an article to be nominated. If you have not done so already please place your arguments about the current article on its deletion discussion page. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The article cited above about Todd Beamer etc have stayed on Wikipedia for well over 1.5 years and not made Afd. My point is lets give this article due time and consideration. Anyways I have expanded the article a bit and split it in more sections. I request people to contribute both in the discussion(Afd) and the expansion. The significant coverage that Major Unnikrishnan is receiving in media and blogging circles is indisputable. Indoresearch (talk) 14:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Keep and Expand: A simple google search shows over 50,000 hits for the name of Major Unnikrishnan, which I believe is a sufficient proof of notability. In addition, hundreds of millions of people know his name by now (specially, anyone who has been watching/reading any news coverage regarding mumbai). This article does not even come close to be deleted. 74.12.141.68 (talk)

Keep: The references given show that he easily meets the criteria for notability. Armourhistorian (talk) 05:32, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep: WP:BIO1E guidelines apply only if the event in question is not notable. This is clearly not the case with the Mumbai terror attacks. Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan remains in the consciousness of the Indian and World media even days after the incident. Numerous media reports have been written about him. His untimely demise has set off a political tremor in the state of his origin that can lead to the resignation of a Chief minister. He is a person whom millions of people want to know more about. Isn't that what encyclopedias are all about - providing accurate information on people and issues that are of interest to the general population? Let's not waste time debating whether or not this article should be deleted and focus instead on the authenticity of the information contained herein. InkReadible (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Why another Afd so soon?

We have just had a lengthy discussion on previous Afd.

There were 4 Delete votes and 28 Keep votes. The argument of notability was made over and over again. But never the less there were many references of notability cited. There are many inline comments added here too. Why an Afd so soon? While I do not agree with the result of discussion as "No consensus". Why do we want to go through the same process of arguments again and take up peoples time? Has this become a topic of ego for people to bring AFDs again and again. If you still want to bring AFD then come after a few months or an year. Let people gather sources and expand the article till then. Indoresearch (talk) 16:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Your reaction is understandable, but you solved the problem easily enough at the 2nd nomination discussion. Please do be aware that an AfD does not work with votes, however, but reaches, instead, a consensus. WP:NOTDEMOCRACY is important to us all, otherwise "ballot packing" would win every discussion. We may not agree with the eventual consensus (as I do not with the first AfD), but we must all honour it (challenging it if we have valid reasons) because it is seen to be a better process than a simple "first past the post" ballot. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment. I believe, most of us are getting the BIO1E wrong. It clearly terms the single event under which an article comes up for deletion as an unimportant event or crime. Although, this Afd has already been withdrawn, still I just wanted to raise it over here. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 07:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Kerala Chief Minister's visit and controversy

It is a big WP:UNDUE, an event after the subject's death, not directly related to the subject, but can be termed as an encounter between his father and the CM. Removing it. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Sourcing more context material for current headings would be a more encyclopedic (and positive) direction.

Volunteers, please jump forwards! Many of us depend on people closer to India to describe the background for us.

Regards, Alastair Haines (talk) 05:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually chief minister refered to himself as a dog replying to the comment by sandeep's father that "no dog need to come here". Many words of the CM was not translated in the english translation, "we are going there because of the attachement towards sadeep's father, sandeep's mother, sandeep's family. Is'nt this attachment something special ? A soldiers father should have understood that." I think it was media that has blown this out of propotion and turning this into a conterversy. It is a shame 117.192.134.105 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC).

Well, this portion is relevant, and has to be retained. This had ignited a lot of controversy in India, and all media carried news on this for days. Even the protesters in Mumbai were holding placards that condemned the Kerala CM's action. It is not as simple as 117.192.134.105 commented. The CM was not willing to apologise first, but later apologised twice, once in the legislative assembly and then before the media. Retaining it with changes in the heading section. Enough links are given, as per Wiki standards. Then why do you want to erase that? -- Sreejith Kumar (talk) 04:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Completely agree that CM's visit is very relevant. Axxn (talk) 03:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Again?

I am removing the tags placed by User:Dbachmann as this has been repeated twice earlier. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 10:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

On second thought, I would rather let it remain and see what come up next. Shovon (talk) 11:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep This article must be kept in wikipedia. People have already voted twice on this. He is regarded as a hero in India now. He and his actions were reported worldwide with great value. This article must be kept. -- Sreejith Kumar (talk) 06:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Today's news says that he has been nominated for Ashoka Chakra Award, which is the highest gallantry award in India during peacetime. Guess, that takes care of all the notability issues. I would still wait till 25th Jan, when it is officially declared. Shovon (talk) 02:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bihar Regiment.gif

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)