Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C. P. Sheoran

: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 per consensus of a failure to meet WP:PROF (Indication of puppetry was also weighed). — CactusWriter ^(talk) 01:08, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

=[[:C. P. Sheoran]]=

:{{la|C. P. Sheoran}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/C._P._Sheoran Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|C. P. Sheoran}})

Non Notable Prof Uncletomwood (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep - Being the director of a law college and previously serving as the head of the department, and the dean of Faculty of law at a university is enough to pass WP:PROF. — Yash^talk stalk 23:57, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:48, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete. It certainly isn't. 9 GS cites fails WP:Prof#C1 by a very large margin. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:33, 14 March 2017 (UTC).

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete. Dean is not a high enough administrative position for automatic notability (he's not head of a whole university) and we don't have the evidence of scholarly impact needed for notability that way (WP:PROF#C1). Merely being published is also not enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:57, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Delete There isn't enough for GNG and the subject is the dean of a college/department, not the university. Thsi is not enough for WP:PROF. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:52, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Speedy Keep - His work on federal government is remarkable. Director of a law college and previously serving as the head of the department, and the dean of Faculty of law at a university is enough to pass WP:PROF.16:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)HariSinghw (talk)
No it is not. Which criterion of WP:PROF do you think being dean passes? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:27, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
keep his work on federal government is remarkable and he is Constitution expert in India.47.9.13.108 (talk) 03:23, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

— 47.9.13.108 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

: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.