Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Humans of Bombay

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. Significant, independent coverage shown to exist. "No it's not" is not a strong argument against detailed evidence otherwise. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Humans of Bombay edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Humans of Bombay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Advertisement of a photography website founded by a non notable person Karishma Mehta. do not satisfy WP:ORGIND. Lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. GermanKity (talk) 10:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 10:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 10:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 10:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment All the provided by User:Beccaynr are not significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject hence failed WP:ORGIND. GermanKity (talk) 15:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you please be more specific about why each source fails GNG? The first few I looked at seemed ok, but you might be more familiar with these news sources than I am. pburka (talk) 17:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no indication of notability. fails WP:ORG. Just a promotional article. RationalPuff (talk) 10:56, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Per WP:WEB, This page gives some rough guidelines which most Wikipedia editors use to decide if a form of web-specific content, being either the content of a website or the specific website itself, should have an article on Wikipedia, and per WP:WEBCRIT, web-specific content[3] may be notable based on meeting one of the following criteria: The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations[4] except for media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site[5] or trivial coverage [...], which may be why the related Humans of New York article exists. But it seems more relevant for this discussion that there are multiple, non-trivial published works independent of the website itself, as noted in my comment above, and per WP:INHERENTWEB, When evaluating the notability of web content, please consider whether it has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education. To review sources per the applicable guideline, I offer the following source assessment table, with an emphasis on the significant and demonstrable effects of the website on culture, society, entertainment, etc:
Source assessment table:
Source Independent? Reliable? Significant coverage? Count source toward GNG?
Being the humans of Bombay, (The Indian Express, 2014) Yes Yes Yes Discusses the beginning of the website, its early popularity, its development, and some of its themes, including social and political issues: "A case in point, their post of two men in an embrace with their quote: “Decriminalise Section 377”, after the Supreme Court, in a ruling in December 2013 upheld the Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. Their latest posts are themed around the elections." ✔ Yes
Meet the Human Behind the Popular ‘Humans of Bombay’ Page, (The Better India, 2015) Yes Yes Yes Discusses the beginning of the website, its early popularity, its development, and some of its philanthropic work, including, "She conducted a Facebook campaign with the aim of raising funds for an organization called Kranti that helps the daughters of sex workers in Mumbai. While the aim was to collect Rs. 5 lakhs, Humans of Bombay ended up collecting Rs. 6.5 lakhs in just one day." ✔ Yes
Her Parents Tried To Marry Her Off At 15, And She Said No. This Is Her Story. (MTV, 2015) Yes Yes Yes Includes "On Wednesday, August 12, Humans of Bombay -- the Indian version of photographer Brandon Stanton’s famous Humans of New York blog — posted a striking pic of a young girl who’s speaking out against child marriage. [...] The post has since gone viral, gaining over 60K likes. People from across the world asked how they can make the girl’s dream of becoming an Indian police service officer a reality. Humans of Bombay reports that she's supported by Aangan, a child protection organization," and additional WP:SECONDARY context and commentary on the significance. ✔ Yes
From the heart, through a lens (The Hindu, 2016) Yes Yes Yes Discusses the increasing popularity of the website, a philanthropic effort to raise funds for a child with blood cancer ("In the first 30 minutes, a lakh was raised. Over the next few days, Rs 10.31 lakh was donated by strangers who wanted her to be able to ‘give her board exams and dance without feeling weak.’"), the development of a related book, and direct discussion of its influence on culture and society, e.g. "For instance, it was on the Humans of Bombay page that celebrity hair stylist Sapna Bhavnani opened up about her gang-rape. Around 88,000 people came out in support of the post and it was shared almost 9,000 times. The influence of the blog was felt when news media ran the story and gave other women the strength to share their own stories of abuse. Another story that captured hundreds of hearts was about a single mother who believed she had married the man of her dreams, but instead faced an abusive marriage and a terrifying escape from her husband," and "The blog made it possible to talk about taboo subjects, and has also allowed people to reach out to one another. For instance, posts about alcoholism or depression are met with support and helpline numbers to combat the illness." ✔ Yes
How Humans of Bombay is helping a sex worker's daughter study at New York University, (FirstPost, 2017) Yes Yes Yes This article opens with a mention of the impact of Humans of New York and states, "One such initiative from India is already getting recognition for their work. The similarly-named ‘Humans of Bombay’ has been following the same model as ‘Humans of New York’, by covering people from all walks of lives and inviting them to share their stories," and concludes with "It is amazing to see the power of social media and how initiatives like ‘Humans of Bombay’ have used their popularity to help real people in need." ✔ Yes
When the Humans of Bombay came to Chennai (The Hindu, 2018) Yes Yes Yes Discusses the ongoing development of the website, its popularity, and its stance within culture and society, i.e. "The page has an underlying theme of being inclusive — of people from every strata of society, of all ages and sexuality." ✔ Yes
Sidharth Shukla gets featured on Humans of Bombay, talks about his mother: ‘My mom was our rock’ (Hindustan Times, 2020) Yes Yes ~ This article begins "Actor and Bigg Boss 13 winner Sidharth Shukla got featured on Humans of Bombay. For a special post on International Women’s Day, he talked about his mother and how she has always supported the family," and includes his statement, which includes, "I have always believed in the concept of equality between men and women. And there’s nothing a woman can’t do which a man can in this day and age." ~ Partial
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
These are not all of the sources available, and these are only English-language sources. Based on the popularity and significance of the website, it seems reasonable to assume that non-English sources also WP:NEXIST. Beccaynr (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr (talk) 15:34, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment All the references provided here do not pass WP:ORGIND. GermanKity (talk) 08:23, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think it is clear WP:ORGIND, i.e. Independence of the author (or functional independence) and Independence of the content (or intellectual independence) are met, especially without any specific objections raised to any of the sources. In addition, there are WP:MULTSOURCES that are reliable, offer WP:SECONDARY analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas, including WP:ORGDEPTH; in addition to WP:GNG, the source assessment table helps show WP:ORG notability is sufficiently supported for an article. Beccaynr (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, a major point for notability (besides the reliable condition of the sources, well detailed by Beccaynr) is that it's India's largest blog. "That ain't beanbag", as Gandhi's British opposition used to say. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:40, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment None of the source is independent if you read those quotes. Smartly, it is been marked as discussion where only an owner of Humans of Bombay are providing news. Claims like India's largest blog is awkward and nowhere related to notability. 1друг (talk) 11:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The table is a summary overview, and a closer review of the sources can show that the table includes quotes from independent and reliable journalists, offering WP:SECONDARY context and commentary that support notability per multiple Wikipedia guidelines. Beccaynr (talk) 18:53, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Beccaynr. Passes WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep' per Beccaynr's source analysis. Tayi Arajakate Talk 22:46, 26 June 2021 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Humans_of_Bombay&oldid=1030881495"