Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahul Kadri

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 delete. ^Complex/_Rational 14:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rahul Kadri[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clearly the product of UPE/COI (created by an SPA and overly promotional in tone), this article is refbombed with no fewer than 74 references and they're an impressive looking bunch at that - until you start digging down when you are faced with a series of press releases, interviews, promotional pieces and 'awards' that are as routine in the world of architecture as the trade magazines that award them. You could argue "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" on the sheer number of sources presented alone, but they are by no means reliable or independent. An architect, doing what architects do - but with clearly an unusual flair for self-promotion. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Architecture, and India. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete carpet ref-bombing is a thing now. Wow, one of the more notable cases for non-notability we've seen. Look at all those sources confirming this person exists... Absolutely non-notable. Nothing in any sort of RS found. Oaktree b (talk) 13:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have taken your feedback into consideration and have made some changes to the article to ensure that it adheres to Wikipedia's guidelines.

Specifically, we have removed some of the unnecessary citations and promotional content. Our aim is to create an informative and neutral article that is based on reliable sources and provides readers with accurate information. SaabHistory29 (talk) 05:38, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Most likely UPE/COI editing, without any real in-depth independent coverage.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:40, 3 April 2023 (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.