Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. Satyanarayana (academic)

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 no consensus. Two predominate voices in this discussion, with no clear consensus in favor of either. There is sourcing, and no BLP issues, so default to keep. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 23:23, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

K. Satyanarayana (academic)

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 17:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think he has done pioneering work in the burgeoning Dalit studies, that is studying the literary works of the former untouchables of India. His two books on Dalit writing and movements (that he has co-edited and introduced) in the four South Indian languages of Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada and Telugu, running into to more than 1400 pages are remarkable for their erudition, breadth of scholarship and the insights that it offers into Dalit writing and Dalit politics. He has also edited another book on Dalit writing which has been prescribed as text books for B.A. literature students in a University in Kerala. (http://www.amazon.in/The-Exercise-Freedom-Introduction-Writing/dp/8189059610)

His academic engagements https://casi.sas.upenn.edu/visiting/satyanarayana https://barefootphilosophers.wordpress.com/2014/11/08/k-satyanarayana-on-dalit-writing-the-politics-of-self-representation/

Take a look at excerpts from his book http://www.thehindu.com/books/no-alphabet-in-sight/article1594191.ece

and some reviews of his book: 1. http://roundtableindia.co.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6924:no-alphabet-in-sight-understanding-caste-formulations-after-1990s&catid=119:feature&Itemid=132 2. http://myeverydayreading.blogspot.in/2012/08/book-review-no-alphabet-in-sight-new.html

I therefore think the author/academic is notable enough to have a wikipedia article. -Mohanbhan (talk) 19:42, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon links to the books: http://www.amazon.com/Alphabet-Sight-Satyanarayana-Susie-Tharu/dp/0143414267 http://www.amazon.com/Steel-Nibs-Are-Sprouting-Writing/dp/9350293765 -Mohanbhan (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahecht and Gene93k:A few more links to his articles and his academic engagements. http://cssaame.dukejournals.org/content/33/3/398.abstract http://www.museindia.com/newsview.asp?id=51 I think he is working in the field of Dalit studies (the study of the literature of former untouchables) who more than 20% of the Indian population and have suffered oppression and exploitation for centuries. I think the notice for the deletion of this article should be removed. Especially considering the fact that his books have been published by three of the most respectable English-language publishing houses in India -- Penguin Books, Harper Collins Publications and Navayana -- and the importance of his pioneering contribution to Dalit studies. -Mohanbhan (talk) 11:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mohanbhan, if you haven't done so already, the description of acceptable sources at WP:RS will help you make your point more convincingly. Links to sales sites like Amazon, to blogs, and to the writings of the person do not establish notability. One needs to find more articles like the review of the author's book in Round Table India. However, that site seems to be not a neutral third-party since it exists to promote a particular viewpoint ("Round Table India believes this is the Ambedkar Age, the age of rising and working towards reshaping society in the light of the Ambedkarite ideals of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity."). It would be better to find reviews in more mainstream publications. So far I do not see sources that would support a keep !vote. LaMona (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have given the sources and links that I found on the net but the fact that these two volumes on Dalit literature in South India are published by mainstream publishing houses like Penguin Books and Harper Collins, and that one of the co-editors Susie Tharu is a renowned academic and Indian feminist should be enough to establish notability as per WP:RS. He is doing important work in bringing together in English translation writers who write in four South Indian languages of Tamil, Kannada, Malayalam and Telugu, about a common theme: the struggle of the subalterns (Dalits). This remarkable and highly significant work must be considered. And what you call "writings by the person" are writings in academic journals, and academic engagements (like delivering lectures and keynote speeches about this new field of Dalit studies) and an academic's notability is established by these things. -Mohanbhan (talk) 16:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahecht, Gene93k, and LaMona:I have put together these links which establish K. Satyanarayana as an academic of international standing in the field of Dalit studies. The deletion notice may now be removed.

Journal Article

“Dalit reconfiguration of caste: representation, identity and politics” Article published in Critical Quarterly

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/criq.12137/abstract

Public lectures:

'Caste, Identity and Dalit movements in contemporary South India' Public Lecture in the ‘Interrogating Social Justice’ series on 'Caste, Identity and Dalit movements in contemporary South India' by Dr. K. Satyanarayana, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad.

http://www.delhievents.com/2013/04/identity-dalit-movements-in.html

‘Writing, Analysing, Translating Dalit Literature’

An event hosted by Leicester University’s Centre for New Writing in partnership with the Centre for Postcolonial Studies at Nottingham Trent University and EMMA, Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3, France 25 June 2014, 4-6pm.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/news/events/2014/june/2018writing-analysing-translating-dalit-literature2019

The Dalit Intellectual Collective (DIC) conference, held at Hyderabad (August 10-12, 2006) The conference was organised by Dalit Intellectual Collective and the Department of Cultural Studies, Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages(CIEFL), Hyderabad. In order to facilitate an interaction with the public and the press a public meeting was organised at the Press Club, Basheerbag on the 11th of August addressed by Prof. Gopal Guru, K. Satyanarayana and Sivakami.

http://www.vakindia.org/pdf/report-dic.pdf

“Conceptualising Dalit Politics: Caste, Identity and Dalit Movements in South India”

K Satyanarayana, The English and Foreign Languages University, Tarnaka, Hyderabad at the 40th World Congress of the International Institute of Sociology held at Delhi in 2012 organized by Swedish Collegium for Advanced Study, Uppsala, Sweden and Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi.

http://www.swedishcollegium.se/iis/iis2012/pdf/mohan_2.pdf

-Mohanbhan (talk) 04:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Mohanbhan, speaking at conferences is a normal activity for academics. To rise to notability as an academic, it has to be shown that this person has had a particular impact on his field. I checked in Google Scholar and his books and articles are rarely cited. Being heavily cited is one way of showing the importance of the person's work. Also, I note that he was editor of the book published by Penguin, not the author. That does make a difference. This may simply be a case of WP:TOOSOON. If so, an article may be appropriate at a later date. LaMona (talk) 15:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep LaMona, I understand what you are saying, but I would like you to consider the fact that this is a new academic field in which very few scholars are working. The Subaltern Studies Collective has existed for two decades now but in spite of having "subalterns" as the field of their study they haven't seriously engaged with the the Dalits (the former untouchables) and their systematic exclusion in India from mainstream discourse. Susie Tharu, Satyanarayana's co-editor, is perhaps the only member of the Subaltern Studies Colective, other than Vijay Prashad, to work on the Dalits and their literature. What makes Satyanarayana so significant he, unlike Susie Tharu and Vijay Prashad is a Dalit himself and is among the few handful of Dalit scholars writing in English. Also, I think it is wrong to judge his notability by looking at the number of citations that his books and citations have received as this is brand new field -- many universities in India started offering courses in Dalit Studies in 2011, after his first volume of Dalit writing South India was produced. Given the "stigmatized" nature of the subject matter -- this being the literature of former "untouchables" of India -- and condiering the pioneering nature of Satyanarayan's work in English, esp. with regard to South Indian Dalit writing I think this article should be retained. (Just take a look at the number of pages I have created based on the three edited volumes of Satyanarayana and Tharu to understand the scope and breadth of his work: Ajay Navaria, Ravikumar (writer), B. Krishnappa, H. Govindaiah, Siddalingaiah (poet), Raj Gauthaman Imayam, Madara Chennaiah, P. Sivakami etc. K.S and Tharu have collected Dalit writing from four South Indian languages spoken by nearly half a billion people. It is not a mean task to have done that. Their work has been funded by Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o and the International Center for Writing and Translation of which he is the Director. All these things must be kept in mind while deciding notability.) -Mohanbhan (talk) 09:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- If your argument is that there isn't evidence of notability because "this is a new academic field", then perhaps it is simply too soon for this person to have a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia's role is not to determine what is important and publicize it, Wikipedia's role is to summarize subjects that are already widely covered. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 14:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Did I say there isn't enough evidence of notability? He is working in a non-English subaltern studies field, and I gave you evidence that Subaltern studies which has been active for over two decades has not covered this stigmatized field. I have given you enough sources from the net to establish the notability of an academic who is working with the marginalized literatures of non-English South Indian languages. How many citations would you get for an academic working in the literatures of say Swahili, Yoruba, Setswana and Amharic? Not many I would say. I can't agree with you on Wikipedia's role. WP is operated by human editors who can think and judge about the significance of people and issues, if it was only about collating and summarizing "subjects" which were widely covered computer programs could have done it. Also, if you are not aware of South Asian literatures and not acquianted with the social issues here I don't think you should take the cocksure stand you have taken. Also, for your info, there are plenty of non-significant people who have a page on WP simply because they are widely covered and their potboilers are sold like FMCG. Literature and books are not capitalist products that their merit could be judged by how much they are sold or how widely they are advertised or "covered". -Mohanbhan (talk) 17:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:52, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Dalit studies is a new but significant field of study and Dr. Satyanarayana appears to be a widely cited, prominent researcher in this area. Unfortunately his first name being an initial makes it difficult to search as there are other K Satyanarayanas who appear to be prominent engineers/biologists, but "K. Satyanarayana + people" has an h-index of 22, "K. Satyanarayana + tribal" 15 in Google Scholar. I also put a ref to an interview with him in a RS. As pointed out by Mohanbhan, his books have been well-received and I think it's significant that two of the biggest newspapers in India chose to excerpt them (most academics don't get this attention). —Мандичка^YO 😜 00:59, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - FYI LaMona, it is standard to be listed as an editor rather than author when much of the work is from multiple contributors; in this case, he is presenting the writings of multiples authors, so even if he writes commentary analyzing their work etc., he would not be listed as author. Being listed as editor does not diminish the significance of the work nor his role in presenting it. —Мандичка^YO 😜 01:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know what an editor is -- not only am I a librarian, but I've been the editor of a book myself. The question is, do we have RS to show that he meets wp:academics and, if so, under which criterion? I'm guessing that the best is #1 "The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources." We need "independent reliable sources." If I've missed them in the lists above, please point them out. It's worth reading through the specific notes on the policy page for hints about awards, etc. If someone can find verifiable links then I'm happy to reconsider. LaMona (talk) 19:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LaMona, these are the notices that his book No Alphabet in Sight: New Dalit Writing from South India Vol 1 has received from reliable sources:

Review in The Hindu: http://www.thehindu.com/books/an-alternative-history/article2150148.ece
Review in The Indian Express: http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/confronting-life/930644/0
Review in Economic and Political Weekly: http://www.epw.in/book-reviews/valuable-intellectual-resource-dalit-writing.html. The last one is pay-walled and can be accessed through JSTOR. -Mohanbhan (talk) 19:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 04:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep User has given reliable sources to show author is notable and author's work is widely read. I think author deserves Wikipedia article, we can improve the article. --Human3015 Call me maybe!! • 14:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a notable personality.Soham321 (talk) 01:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: We have three keeps to two deletes. Can we keep the article? LaMona, you said you would reconsider if you find verifiable links to establish notability. And I have provided 3 reviews in prominent Indian periodicals. -Mohanbhan (talk) 13:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an actual vote, and the admin will make a decision based on the information. I still think this person doesn't meet the criteria for wp:academics and that this page is wp:toosoon. However, the closing admin may see it differently, that that's fine. LaMona (talk) 14:38, 5 July 2015 (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.