Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rukshan Widyalankara

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. T. Canens (talk) 09:05, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rukshan Widyalankara

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

The article appears to be a resume written by someone in close connection to the subject (WP:PROMO). It also doesn't appear to satisify WP:PROF or WP:CREATIVE. Dan arndt (talk) 06:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 06:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Dan arndt (talk) 06:31, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Most of the provided references are reliable, but they do no more than briefly mention the subject as the president/architect/etc. Good for verification, not good for meeting WP:GNG. The Awards are relatively minor, and being the first Sri Lankan president of the CAA isn't a serious achievement in my mind given his previous success on the committee. As for the text itself, I concur that it's quite promotional and would need a rewrite to remove weasel words and vague language (e.g. "several buildings of note"). Primefac (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, on the basis being both president of the SLIA and the CAA gives him a certain profile beyond the average architect. Though (as Primefac says) many news articles only mention him briefly, there are several that profile him, his life and achievements. The article needs clean-up but not deletion. Sionk (talk) 21:47, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Sionk: - even the inaugural president of the SLIA or the CAA don't have articles, if Widyalankara had won the The Robert Matthew Award or something similar there may be a case to argue. As indicated all the references cited are just brief mentions in passing - none of which establish notability. Dan arndt (talk) 03:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some people are notable for one major event or achievement, others for lesser achievements which, nonetheless, add up. I don't really put any weight on his student achievemtns, but if he won the Young Architect of the Year Award and awards for buildings he designed, it certainly suggests he meets WP:GNG or WP:CREATIVE. Sionk (talk) 20:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Sionk: - none of the references cited provide any evidence that he actually won 'Young Architect of the Year', apart from a statement by Widyalankara saying he did. There really should be reliable sources provided if the subject of the article is deemed to be notable. Almost all the references cited just mention him in passing. Dan arndt (talk) 01:00, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, subject need not necessarily be the recipient of the World Architect award to be recognised.DilJco (talk) 00:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC) User:DilJco is the creator of this article. Disclosure added per WP:AFDFORMAT[reply]

Comment - there should be some indication as to what Widyalankara has done that is notable. Certainly winning or even been nominated for a notable architecture prize would go a long way to establishing notability. Widyalankara clearly wasn't the first architect to be the president of the SLIA or CAA. I can't even find any evidence that when he was the president he achieved anything notable on behalf of the association. Dan arndt (talk) 03:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - just because one is dumb it is unwise to assume that others are dumberDilJco (talk) 05:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ^Talk 12:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - notability not established.--Staberinde (talk) 17:08, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ☮JAaron95 ^Talk 17:54, 13 August 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.