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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 05:58, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brajesh Tiwari[edit]

Brajesh Tiwari (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)

Perfectly normal academic, co-authoring, publishing papers and so on. Article sourced to primary sources (papers etc), University website. Despite impressive looking reference section, subject presents no evidence of notability, no media coverage, no evidence of enduring academic impact. Strange mixture, in fact, of food processing and banking. WP:NOTCV very much applies here, and so does failing WP:GNG. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and India. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:33, 10 October 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.