Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manish Kejriwal (4th nomination)

Manish Kejriwal

Manish Kejriwal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I've seen six sources that more or less focus on the subject. The first two are about his departure from McKinsey and the founding of Kedaara, both are related to the same event. Another source is an unbylined, quote-based article. The fourth source is an unbylined piece about his inclusion in a "super rich" list, which doesn't contain sigcov. The fifthfifth source is not independent. The sixth source is a listing of 25 young executives setting the corporate fast-track on fire. I don't think this is enough for GNG. Kelob2678 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India. Kelob2678 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
• Delete – Only IP Users/LLM supported maintaining in the last two AfDs, and the current version of the article is only WP:PROMO. Svartner (talk) 16:54, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:07, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Keep – the subject meets WP:GNG. Independent reliable sources (including Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, Mint, and The Economic Times) provide coverage of his role at Temasek, the founding of Kedaara Capital, and his investment activities; this goes beyond routine mentions or a single event. While the article may have promotional tone and could benefit from trimming and improved sourcing, these are cleanup issues rather than grounds for deletion. JournalJane (talk) 18:18, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@Kelob2678 Thank you for your work on this discussion. I understand you have concerns about the article, and differing views are part of the AfD process. However, it is not appropriate to label another editor’s comment as LLM-generated simply because you disagree with their view. Please don’t mark my review as LLM again, especially without notifying me on my talk page about it. My review and vote were made independently and in good faith, based on my understanding of the notability guidelines. AfD is built on multiple perspectives, and a single vote does not determine the outcome, that’s why we have these discussions. JournalJane (talk) 01:18, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

• I hatted your comment because I believe it was AI-generated, not because I disagree with you. Please, assume good faith. Kelob2678 (talk) 17:23, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Per nom and the source analysis. Page reads more like promotional. RangersRus (talk) 12:20, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

  Recent edits have toned down the promotional language and improved neutrality of the article. Any remaining issues appear editorial and can be further refined through normal clean-up. HibaShaikh (talk) 03:43, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment I believe the concerns raised here were already addressed in the last AfD for this article.

The first two are about his departure from McKinsey and the founding of Kedaara. both are related to the same event. so? Are you asserting these reputable sources are just press releases, or are you saying only one counts because they cover the same event? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HibaShaikh (talk • contribs) 03:46, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

1. The Economic Times Article: This piece discusses his departure from Temasek and his intent to launch a new fund.

2. The Business Standard Article: This notes the actualization of his partnership with Sunish Sharma and details his specific deal track record.

These sources are editorial features, not routine corporate announcements. They provide deep biographical coverage that goes well beyond the routine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HibaShaikh (talk • contribs) 03:51, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

I’ve addressed the source 3 previously. The Mint article isn’t actually unbylined. Regardless, a missing byline doesn’t automatically make a source unreliable—especially for a Tier-1 Indian financial daily like Mint which has strict editorial standards. It’s easy to see by reading the content that this is an editorial piece, not PR.

Keep in mind this piece is from 2008; the lack of a visible byline on current digital archives is likely just a technical formatting issue from a website migration, not a lack of authorship. Its actually a first-person feature where the author identifies themselves right in the text. As for the quotes—using them is standard journalism. They don’t disqualify the entire source; they only mean we shouldn’t rely on the quoted parts for independence. There is still plenty of non-quoted, independent editorial content here providing significant coverage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HibaShaikh (talk • contribs) 03:53, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Since the Business Standard article is unbylined, I’m providing another bylined source that confirms Manish Kejriwal is the first-ever India-based private equity (PE) fund manager included in the 2023 Hurun India Rich List.

The source 4 and 5 articles are duplicates, both from Business Standard. I’ve already linked a bylined source above that verifies the Hurun India Rich List details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HibaShaikh (talk • contribs) 03:56, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Source 6 wasn’t provided as a standalone GNG-winner, but rather to demonstrate sustained coverage over two decades. The claim that all coverage is tied to Kedaara is simply factually incorrect.

There is a wealth of significant, independent coverage from well before Kedaara was even founded—another 2007 from The Economic Times offers significant coverage. Under WP:GNG, two articles with significant coverage are typically sufficient to meet the multiple sources requirement and establish notability.

The subject is frequently featured and sought out by top-tier outlets like the NYT, WSJ, Reuters, and Bloomberg as an expert and pioneer in the PE industry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HibaShaikh (talk • contribs) 04:01, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Individuals who are not notable typically don't receive this level of sustained, national and international coverage. It shows that the subjects work has received sustained attention from independent aources. He is consistently characterized as a billion-dollar dealmaker and a private equity pioneer. Furthermore, the closing of his recent $1.74 billion fund wasn’t merely local news; it drew significant international coverage from Bloomberg and others which clearly shows notability.HibaShaikh (talk) 04:11, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

• I fixed the link to the fifth source. Regarding the 2007 source you provided, it is too brief and contains only two paragraphs that are actually about him, roughly 150 words. Kelob2678 (talk) 08:23, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

  Notability is about the depth of coverage, not word count. A focused article detailing career milestones is far more significant than a long, trivial mention. Even if we consider word count, this source clearly meets WP:100W.

  The subject isn’t a passing mention. He is the main focus of the article and is highlighted in the headline for leading a massive $6.2 billion global transaction. This deal received wide coverage in international and financial media.

  The source also includes biographical details beyond this high stakes deal, which shows clear and significant coverage of the subject. HibaShaikh (talk) 11:59, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

• Delete and salt. I concur with Kelob2678's source assessment. This article appears to be part of a broader set of articles—including Sunaina Kejriwal, Kamalnayan Bajaj Hall and Art Gallery (now a redirect), and other Bajaj family-related articles—that were created and/or continue to be maintained by the same SPAs and spammers. Yuvaank (talk) 01:44, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

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.