Deletion of Mahesh Verma

Comment: Notability established per , meeting both criteria, awards and contributions and also on , criteria nos, 2, 3, 6, and 8
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO||WP:NACADEMICS)

Comment: Notable per  and . --Vigyani
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACADEMICS||WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: I am very surprised at the present nomination, which is made on the basis of notability. The article was originally put forward for speedy deletion as promotional (#G11), which seems to me a '''far''' better rationale for deletion than questions about the subject's notability. The article is totally promotional from start to finish, telling us over and over again how wonderful Mahesh Verma is, and it is totally unsuitable as a Wikipedia article. I am, of course, fully aware of the fact that articles which are totally promotional but on potentially notable subjects are often defended on the grounds that "it could be re-written so that it is suitable", but in my experience editors who advance that as a "keep" reason virtually never actually do the re-writing: once an article is kept so that it can be re-written it is then just left. If anyone wants to Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over|blow it up and start over then that will be fine, but the present article is ''totally'' unsuitable, and I see no benefit in keeping it. ''The editor who uses the pseudonym
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD)