Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suril Shah (3rd nomination)

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 procedural closed because there is nothing in Wikipedia guidelines about allowing an AfD from more than a decade ago to be reopened. If desired, bring up for a new AfD using the proper process (with understanding a lot about this article may have changed in 10 years). SouthernNights (talk) 13:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suril Shah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD

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

I have proposed this topic for deletion. I believe this article fails to meet notability guidelines. If you actually read his citations, the only person who says he is the youngest is his father. The claims of the youngest person to pass the test are unclear. In fact, if you look at his citations it even says "But the institutes he acquired his certificates from don’t maintain age records. So we cannot prove he is the youngest to achieve what he has." One of the citations is a dead link. The other is a quote from the Stanford Daily where he talks about a class. It has nothing to do with any achievements.

Echo10 (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An oldie but a goodie.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jp×g 09:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Computing, and India. jp×g 09:31, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This was a blatant vanity article even by the standards of 2010, when this malformed nomination was created (but never linked to a daily logpage, and never added to one by a bot since it didn't have the proper AfD headers). By the standards of 2022, it seems even more gratuitous. jp×g 09:33, 23 July 2022 (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.