Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debayan Dasgupta

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Debayan Dasgupta

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Debayan Dasgupta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Scientist without a significant publication record or any awards. (There are others with the same name who are more notable.) The only possible claims would be based upon founding the company Theranautilus, but I am unclear whether that page itself passes notability. They have been around for too long for draftification, so AfD discussion is appropriate. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah. I think its ok to delete it. Xortical (talk) 09:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. While the article creator is saying Deletion is okay, they actually didn't contribute to the current article so CSD G7 would not be valid.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: From my analysis, it fails WP:NACADEMIC due to insufficient SIGCOV. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️^{(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)} 12:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

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.