Deletion of Atul Chitnis (3rd nomination)

Comment: The major issue here is the nominator finds the subject to be "Inherently non-notable", since the article lacks non-trivial reliable and independent sources. However, a quick search reveals that there are plenty of references available. Ignoring the trivial one-line mentions in http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=atul+chitnis several notable (and independent) publications, here are a few of them: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/36049350.cms Interview with The Times of India, http://www.bpb.de/themen/60RX3Y,0,0,Der_Fuchs_der_Innovationen.html interview with :de:Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung|Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/25/stories/2004092515920300.htm news article in The Hindu, http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/78335 article in Heinz Heise|Heise, http://www.rediff.com/search/2002/aug/21net1.htm interview with Rediff (none of these are one-line mentions, and all the publications are |reliable and independent). If you feel that the article lacks good references, it's better to tag it with {{tl|primarysources}} or {{tl|refimprove}} instead of nominating it for deletion. Also, I don't see any evidence of the subject making any edits to the article, that can be deemed as "self-promotion" (|as alleged). The article history indicates that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:AGF)