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. Seems like there is no evidence of notability, either under WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. Maybe non-English sources can be found, in that case please post on WP:DRV seeking a review, please. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ritam Banerjee[edit]

Ritam Banerjee (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No indication of notability. Salt and burn BLP. Kavdiamanju (talk) 16:08, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Boy, that's a big trophy. The guy's certainly an accomplished photographer but Gnews and Gsearch doesn't reveal any significant independent solo coverage, nor has he yet received the kind of exhibits or honours that would meet the additional criteria for creative types. Delete. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• That said, there may be Hindi or Bengali coverage I'm missing. That's possible. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply No article in the Hindi or Bengali wikipedia, where it would have been easy to extract refs. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 13:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Our systemic bias might make me more inclined to delete if he were from a country where wikipedia gives good coverage, I suspect we need better coverage of India. And I found a reliable secondary source ref without having to look very hard. I appreciate there are problems with editors on thsi article, seems I just got it looking neutral and an editor has come in piling on the puff-piece and with little idea of how to write an encyclopedic bio of a living person but I am happy to keep editing it for neutrality. It has been advertised on upwork so needs careful watching but none of this has anything to do with whether the article should be deleted, hence my falling on the keep side. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 13:56, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Fails all criterias of WP:CREATIVE. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment An additional problem I have with this article that it's written like an advertisement for commercial photographer. He does have one award in not very known movie festival which may satisfy WP:CREATIVE, but this looks like WP:COATRACK for his commercial photography. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 11:52, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Me and some friends created this article which is about a photographer we study and like. We are photography students living in India, and although we have little knowledge of how Wikipedia works, we love what Wikipedia does and wanted to include there something we are proud of and think deserves a place in Wikipedia.

This page was recently tagged saying it needed more references, and because I didn't know what this meant at the time, I posted an ad requesting someone help me with this. Someone did take on this job, but then quit when there was an issue with a photograph used. Oddly enough, the person I hired has a very similar username to the editor who proposed this article for deletion.

We are just starting to learn how Wikipedia works, and will be fully transparent about our contributions here and any future editing. We will also stop editing this article as we feel it's now been handled by people who know what needs to be done.

There are many more references about Ritam Banerjee that I did not include: [1]], [[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and more (as well as more in Indian press). 219.91.152.121 (talk) 18:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Based on RichardWeiss's proposal to edit and Arthistorian1977's assessment that the article may satisfy WP:CREATIVE. Aust331 (talk) 07:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, I actually think it must be deleted. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, seemed to have misinterpreted your comment about the award you found that may help the article meet WP:CREATIVE. Regardless, if User:RichardWeiss thinks this is something he can clean up, I'm willing to vote in favor of keeping. Aust331 (talk) 13:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there are no convincing collections or other convincing substance. SwisterTwister talk 04:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Article reads like an advertisement. I looked at all of the references in the article, none qualify as WP:RS. I also did my own google search. The first page of search results includes, in order:

1. His own website
2. Our article
3. Facebook
4. Behance (a photo commerce site)
5. Descreative, self-described as "an Indian Advertising Creative blog"
6. Twitter
7. LinkedIn
8. Instragram
9. Pintrest
10. Wagonart, another photography commerce site

This is not the sort of coverage notable people have. I agree about having to fight systemic bias, but there's a line, and this goes way over it. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Agree with RoySmith. Person not notable. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 05:33, 3 September 2016 (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.