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 speedy keep. Clearly notable, otherwise no vaild reason to delete and therefore closing per WP:SK#2. (non-admin closure) KGirl ^{(Wanna chat?)} 22:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kanta Gupta[edit]

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

Non-notable professor. The fact that she died around a year and half ago and a date of death on Wikipedia was not posted until today shows the failure of this article's existence. Also there is very sources about this professor. All them seem to be from Winnipeg and none of them seem to show even local importance. For example none of the local newspaper (other than an empty obituary) even show this professor passed away. --Luigi Waluigi (talk) 14:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:07, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:07, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. FRSC is a clear pass of WP:PROF#C3 and her distinguished professor title is a clear pass of #C5. "Death date not included" is an invalid reason for deletion, justifying a speedy keep. And the rest of the nomination statement makes clear that the nominator hasn't even considered WP:PROF, the appropriate notability guideline (not GNG) for this sort of case. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:10, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- appears to meet PROF as distinguished professor and recipient of the Krieger–Nelson Prize. An acceptable stub at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:45, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Clear pass of WP:PROF and the WP:GNG based on the sources already present in the article. An article not being up-to-date is not a valid rationale for deletion. – Joe (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - There are tags for instances where articles need to be updated. It is a part of mainting the encyclopedia but is by no means a reason to delete an article.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2017 (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.