Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Welding Kumar

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 keep. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welding Kumar[edit]

Well structured and referenced article. However I'm afraid it may violate Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts) Shadowjams (talk) 03:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —--Like I Care 04:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- SpacemanSpiff (talk) 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems to be notable enough.Wikireader41 (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As noted by nomination, it does not satisfy Notability (criminal acts), specifically Perpetrators. VasuVR (talk, contribs) 04:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Salih (talk) 05:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some might think that it makes no sense how a criminal like him should get an article in wikipedia. The guy became very notorious during the attack on advocate Shanmugasundaram in 1995 (related to TANSI land scam case) for which he was convicted and serves life term. I could produce hundred more sources only if online news was available since before 1995. He is not only notable for that incident, he was involved in attack on minister Mullai Vendhan. He has four murder cases and several other criminal cases to his credit. Pretty much every newspaper reading individual in Chennai knows about him and many more in Tamil Nadu. He is even discussed in a book about organised crime. So, it is not about one criminal case, Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts) mostly deals with one time criminal event. I dont understand the claim of non-notability. --Like I Care 12:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clarification - Are the victims of these crimes high-profile individuals? Politicians, celebs, etc? That would bolster the claim. However a long time criminal record alone isn't enough. Part of the expanded policy in regards to criminal acts is a kind of journalistic professionalism to not promote or publicize criminal acts. Typically these articles are focused on the crime or incident, and it takes something extra to go beyond that for an individual article. Shadowjams (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The case that got him to prominence was a highly political one, and the victim subsequently became a member of parliament. While in Jail, he also attacked a former minister of the state government, and another prominent politician. The coverage of one event was pretty much daily for over a few months by most newspapers including The Hindu and The Indian Express. The other incidents did not receive as much coverage although they did receive a fair bit. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 20:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes, some are notable individuals. One former Tamil Nadu minister (Mullai Vendan), one lawyer (he was notable as lawyer because he filed a case against former Chief minister of Tamil nadu, Jayalalitha in a land scandal) who later went on to become a member in Rajya Sabha (Shanmugasundaram). Well, they dont have their articles yet which doesnt mean anything though. --Like I Care 20:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've finally decided. Reasons - not a one time criminal, he had a few murders to his credit prior to the famous Shanmugasundaram case. Subsequently there's also the attack on Mullai Vendan, a former Minister and John Pandian, city councilman and a regional politician. Also, the motivation for the Shanmugasundaram case falls under "unusual or has otherwise been considered noteworthy such that it is a well-documented historic event" as this particular incident was in retaliation for a corruption case against the then Chief Minister, let to a three week strike by the Madras High Court Lawyers association (therefore judicial activity was pretty much suspended) and finally the courts had to intervene and transfer investigation and prosecution of the case from the state govt to the federal govt. While Tamil Nadu elections tend to follow a toggle switch, this particular incident also contributed significantly to Jayalalitha losing the next election: from a 224-4 position it switched against her 8-221. So, as much as I hate the guy, and had to suffer reading about him every day, he is notable. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 23:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems to be enough coverage here to establish notability. Davewild (talk) 08:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Expand the article a bit to include why and when on the listed murders, and why he attacked R. Shanmugasundaram. Once these are addressed I believe it would satisfy WP:N/CA. The other murders would be "notable for something beyond the crime itself". Click23 (talk) 17:11, 24 June 2009 (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.