This AFD on my Bio Rajkumar Kanagasingam is brought only to distract the offences at wikipedia after stealing my e-mail address and thereafter my wiki passwords by Netmonger and his/her group and nothing else. How this user can bring this AFD before he clears himself from the offences which is now under investigation under an Administrator’s supervision and the details are here.Rajkumar Kanagasingam 10:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The references are multiple, but not non-trivial.

Image:Rajsingam29.JPG says that he was "felicitated by former President J. R. Jaywardene" for his peace program and that he is "Honorary Executive Committee member of the UNA of Sri Lanka.". Presidents felicitate many students and give loads of medals.

Image:Rajsingam13.jpg is about a non-stop 20 minute speech given by him at SAARC, prepared "for glory and his own goals". Image:Rajsingam9.jpg is him handing over a video copy of his 20-minute speech to dignatiries. Image:Rajsingam3.jpg is again a photo about the 20-minute speech. Image:Rajkumar on US Economy.jpg is about him delivering a lecture on "Global Role of US Economy..."

Image:Rajsingam7.jpg is "Around the city" corner of The Hindu that says he is going to give a lecture, in an attempt to raise fund for Gujarat earthquake victims

Image:Rajkumar & Spain(SPCIDI).jpg, Image:Rajsingam26.JPG, Image:Rajsingam31.JPG, Image:Postconflict Initiative.jpg, Image:Rajsingam25.JPG, Image:Rajsingam24.JPG, Image:Rajsingam42.JPG, Image:Rajsingam27.JPG and Image:Rajsingam8.jpg are photos of him giving copy of reports authored by him to dignatiries. In fact Image:Rajsingam8.jpg appears under the "Business Advertorial" column. Image:Rajsingam6.jpg is actually a report about Mrs. Bandarnaike, that consists of a photo of him explaining his peace mission to her.

Image:Rajsingam11.jpg says Sri Chinmoy "presented a peace medal to Rajkumar Kanagasingam, who participated in the special divisoion of the Peace Relay held at independence Square Sports grounds." Image:Rajsingam30.JPG and Image:Rajsingam32.JPG also talk of him receiving this medal.

Image:Vanni34.JPG, Image:India54.JPG, Image:Malaysia12.JPG, [1], [2], [3], and [4] are articles written by him. Image:LettertoEditor.jpg is a letter written to the editor.

Image:Care35.jpg is a "service certificate" that says he worked for CARE International as an accountant. Image:Jaffnacentral.jpg is certificate from his college that states he was a good student and participated in extra-curricular activities. Image:Businessaward.jpg is a photo of him receiving the best BA result award.

How do any of these make him notable enough for an article? utcursch | talk 09:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• The primary criterion of WP:N only requires multiple, non-trivial mentions in appropriate sources. Although perhaps marginal, several of these references meet that criterion. Thus he is notable. As outlined in WP:N#Notability is not subjective, editors are not required to judge his achievements, the media has done it for us. Ccscott 19:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm somewhat concerned that all the references for the Wikipedia article appear to come from either newspaper articles written by the subject of the WP article, or from unsigned newspaper articles in papers he wrote columns for, and that it's therefore not unreasonable to think he might have written those unsigned articles. I'm not sure how to apply the notability criteria in this case, which is why I'm not putting forward an opinion on the merits of the AFD. LastChanceToBe 20:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• URGENT COMMENT: Please do not reformat this page again unless you discuss the reformatting on the talk page first and get the approval of the people whose comments you intend to move around. Twice, now, comments which were put in specific indentations by people who were intending to make a reply have been moved around incorrectly. I understand that the editors who did it were only trying to help, but such changes should be discussed first, since the changes were incorrect both times. LastChanceToBe 18:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all following WP:TPG and keeping votes to their separate lines and replies correctly tabbed underneath them makes it a lot easier for the closing admin to see the votes, which is why I formatted it that way. And if you say any error in that things will have been much better off if you took the trouble to correct the formatting than simply reverting. Thank you. --snowolfD4^{( talk / @ )} 18:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't understand what I was saying. I'm saying that both of the reformats put comments in the wrong place. I had to revert, because if my comments were put in the wrong place then I must assume that it's possible that someone else's comments were put in the wrong place. Having seen that there was a serious error in reformatting, I wasn't going to go and try to correct it myself. I was going to put things back the way the original commenters had put things, and then state that discussion needed to happen about where people's comments belonged. And that's what's happening now in this talk page. LastChanceToBe 19:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had to reformat aging. Could you find out and let me know that, still you having that prob? Thanks. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 19:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The formatting was still wrong. Please, before anyone formats anyone else's comments, ASK who they were intending to reply to. LastChanceToBe 19:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me and snowolfd4 was following the WP:TPG. You are the one who messed it up buddy. If you found that one of you message was on the wrong place, what you had to do is fixing that(only that). Not simply reverting all. Since we are not mind readers how can we understand your feelings. You just said "I had to revert, because if my comments were put in the wrong place". Even anyone who reading through will understand that you are commenting on Bakaman's vote. Please WP:Assume good faith. Thanks. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ ^{walkie-talkie} 19:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]