Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jitto Arulampalam

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

:({{Find sources AFD|Jitto Arulampalam}})

I do not believe that the subject of this article is notable, and generally only has brief mentions in news articles of his [ex-]roles in various companies. The references do not discuss him in detail, and the ones that do are not independent, such as the reference [http://www.progen-pharma.com/company/board.aspx from the company he is the chairman of]. The lack of coverage of him is shown by the references generally only containing brief mentions of his name, followed by nothing else about him, such as [http://www.smh.com.au/business/nab-joins-muddled-echo-party-20120306-1uidp.html this from SMH], [http://www.kazakhpotash.com/kazakhstan_potash_corporation_08072011.html this from Kazakhstan Potash Corporation], and [http://www.computerworld.com.au/tag/jitto-arulampalam/news this from Computer World].

I checked news articles and sites that weren't referenced in the article, such as [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/soup-heir-is-hopeful-his-cup-runneth-over/story-fnp4m2h5-1227111397447?nk=8129c4701a637f65a82b1a9f6e3e6aa9 this one from "The Australian"], which appeared to not provide much coverage of him, other than a brief mention of him and his current and previous businesses, which they seem to have done with almost every person they've mentioned on the article. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 20:15, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

::Correction: This is the right link to access [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Jitto+Arulampalam%22&tbm=nws "The Australian"]; the quoted link doesn't navigate to the intended article; it is not the fault of the nominator.Eesan1969 (talk) 03:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: He is notable. Australian Financial Review MIS Magazine 2006 recognized him as one of the Top 25 global rising stars. The nominator is too stubborn what he/she does, is correct. He went for CSD immediately after my creation of this article. Now he has nominated this article for deletion. He is maintaining a log highlighting his/her CSD of articles here. He/she should concentrate more on expanding this project rather than displaying petty things.Eesan1969 (talk) 03:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

::If he/she would have placed Notability tag, I might have appreciated him/her since there are room for expansion of this page.Eesan1969 (talk) 03:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

:::Why would I have added the notability tag to an article, when I consider AfD to be a more suitable location to deal with it? I can't find a mention of this "Top 25 global rising stars" list anywhere, other than on pages about this person, such as on his biography on the company's website he is chairman of. I also can't find anything that makes this MIS Australia magazine to be notable, and can simply find a mention of it closing down in January 2012, with all employees moving to the parent company. There is nothing to show that this list you speak of is notable, or that any individuals on it are notable. This mention in a magazine seems to be the one event you're attempting to establish notability on. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 13:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

::::When you consider an Afd after your Cfd even after my expansion from one source of reference to a number of other, I can consider you are trying to push your POV stubbornly.

::::One thing you should remember, the closure of Far Eastern Economic Review doesn't make, that was an infamous magazine.

::::MIS Magazine [http://www.webmail.influencing.com/au/story/afr-takes-over-mis was only taken over] by its parent company The Australian Financial Review.

::::MIS Magazine is quoted here as "[http://www.ovations.com.au/speakers/mark-jones.html ..........Financial Review's MIS Magazine Australia's leading magazine for CIOs and senior technology executives.]".

::::MIS Magazine is quoted [https://www.google.lk/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=TkFeVPSvBJXkuQS-6oGQCA#q=%22the+australian+financial+review%22+%22mis+magazine%22 in number of other places], makes it notable.

::::MIS Magazine's [https://www.google.lk/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=kk9eVPynJdCMuAS7-oHwCg#q=global+rising+stars+mis+magazine global rising star] is fairly popular and was awarded to a number of others.

::::Australian Online Security Company, TrustDefender, [http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/11/prweb570920.htm Named a 'Global Rising Star' in MIS Magazines'] 'Annual Strategic 100' Issue.Eesan1969 (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

• Keep as suitable stub article which does not have any policy violations and the subject appears to meet WP:GNG through coverage (some brief some lengthy) in independent reliable sources. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 19:55, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

:: {{ping|Thine Antique Pen}} If the phrase published is [http://www.progen-pharma.com/company/board.aspx recognised by the 2006 Australian Financial Review MIS Magazine as one of the "Top 25 global rising stars"], we need to see if the 2006 source actually did so. I found [http://www.afr.com/p/item_0gdXwJlW89rbrZDzKcxx8I this AFR from May 1, 2006] but subscription required. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 20:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

:: Found confirmed by and [http://www.bloomberg.com/article/2008-12-18/adY.XWPLWYLA.html published] in Bloomberg Businessweek, as attributed to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=DGAP+News&fulltext=1 DGAP-News]. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 20:24, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

• Keep Obviously compliant to GNG. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 19:27, 12 November 2014 (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.