Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abhishek Leela Pandey

: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 speedy delete. Deleted at request of author and sole content contributor, under G7. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

=[[Abhishek Leela Pandey]]=

:{{la|Abhishek Leela Pandey}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Abhishek_Leela_Pandey Stats])

:({{Find sources|Abhishek Leela Pandey}})

Found this with a BLPPROD on it, it's been sort-of-sourced but it still doesn't look very notable to me, so bringing it here. Black Kite (talk) 06:05, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Mephistophelian (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Mephistophelian (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Mephistophelian (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Mephistophelian (talk) 07:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Delete as a non-notable subject, lacking independent and verifiable sources. With the earlier removal of an unproven assertion regarding the critical reception of a manuscript, there isn't anything that otherwise confers notability or credibility. After considering the sources, it’s evident that

::Omkar Vighne's blog is unreliable, a poorly-written review that someone likely drafted within minutes, without any proof-reading for coherence or grammar

::In retailing the author's creative output, the Dialabook and I-Proclaim bookstores aren't independent from the subject

::Where Ink Splashers Publications is the publisher of the subject's literature, it reasonably follows that the company is similarly partisan. Mephistophelian (talk) 07:20, 12 September 2012 (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.