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. We're done feeding socks. As with the other articles impacted by their nonsense, I'm not draftifying this. However if @Necrothesp: or another established editor wants to work on this, happy to provide. Star Mississippi 01:41, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Raghunath Behura[edit]

Raghunath Behura (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

To a degree a test case, but subject and content does not seem to pass the bar for an article under WP:GNG with most RS about the death event which was apparently a non-notable car accident. There is a question if either the President's Police Medal for long service, which while honourable, is ranked below the gallantry version, or if Additional director general of police is sufficient reason to satisfy WP:ANYBIO, bearinig in mind statesin India are often larger and more populous than many countries. A WP:NPP has tagged the article for notability but the article author has improved the article and they seem convinced nootability is now satisfied. My BEFORE noted the personal obituary [1] but WP:ANYBIO does not seemed satsfied. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP he Intelligence Bureau, RAW, NSG and State Intelligence are top Law enforcement agencies of India. The subject person was the ADG of the Intelligence Bureau at the time of his death. He had 5 more years of service, in which any IPS officer gets DG rank. If the subject doesn't pass WP:GNG of a dead police officer (2nd highest rank), then I wonder what else might be eligible. It should be KEEP. :) --NeverTry4Me - TT page 23:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep ADG of the IB seems notable enough, rank is similar to the Deputy Director of the FBI. Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 06:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 11:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify I think that notability is there once there is more information about what they did in various roles and what they were involved with.Gusfriend (talk) 11:38, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This does not meet notability guidlines. Starship SN20 talk — Preceding undated comment added 13:45, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - doesn't meet WP:GNG, and not sure of what SNG CapnJackSP is thinking about in their keep !vote, but unaware of any SNGs which say the deputy director a state agency is automatically notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• As per "the deputy director a state agency", I shall make it clear that, Intelligence Bureau is not a state agency, nor the subject person was deputy director. The subject person was Additional director general of police(2nd highest rank) of Intelligence Bureau, who died on duty, before his retirement. --NeverTry4Me - TT Page 19:26, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Held what was essentially the highest rank in the Indian Police Service (the highest rank, not the head of, for the pedants - there is a difference!) and was deputy director of the Intelligence Bureau, India's national security and counter-intelligence agency. Clearly notable per WP:COMMONSENSE. Also passes WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 08:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Run-of-the-mill case! GeezGod (talk) 09:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Blocked sock. Star Mississippi 03:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Semi Protected to stop the sock disruption and allow this to come to a conclusion. If this gets relisted by a non-admin, feel free to ping me to extend the protection. Star Mississippi 18:16, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No, the subject does not meet the GNG (the vast amount of the coverage being around his death in an auto accident, a ONEEVENT); no, there is no notability criterion covering subordinate provincial police officials; and no, COMMONSENSE isn't a trump card that substitutes for an utter lack of any notability criteria upon which to hang one's barracks cover. At AfD, we rule on the notability criteria that actually exist, not the ones individual editors wish did. Article created by now-indeffed NeverTry4Me. Ravenswing 00:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No indication of notability under the GNG; what sources are available that are significant are not independent or not reliable and vice-versa No indication of notability under any applicable SNG; appointed civil servants are not notable simply by virtue of their position exept in limited cases that do not apply here. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:18, 24 February 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.