Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zahid Ahmed (actor)

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 delete. I'm unable to understand the opinion by GreenCricket, and the other "weak keep" opinion doesn't actually make an argument. Sandstein 18:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zahid Ahmed (actor)

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG, unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent and do not cover him becoming a Dad JMHamo (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Once he will have had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions he will qualify for an encyclopaedic article per WP:NACTOR. Until then, not a single word in the article is suggestive of his WP:SIGNIFICANCE and the article should be deleted under WP:CSD#A7. kashmiri ^TALK 15:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Keep He is significant figure and has a side info in google, he is notable for google but its wiki link is linked to Pakistani ODI cricketer which must be replaced by Zahid Ahmed (actor) so i suggest to keep it GreenCricket (talk) 11:07, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to replicate side info in Google which only returns 212 hits on "zahid ahmed" actor.[1] Can you link it please? There is a side info for Zahid Ahmad the cricketer, it might have some incorrectly matched images. kashmiri ^TALK 12:36, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless anyone has better Pakistani coverage as I'm not seeing anything to suggest even minimal solid notability. SwisterTwister talk 03:18, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Side info is for ACTOR

Side-info on google is for Zahid Ahmed Actor not for cricketer..It is mistakenly linked to article of a cricketer because there was no article on wiki for Actor Zahid Ahmed...How can you imagine a side-info for a cricketer who has played two ODIs for Pakistan only and even he is not a Test cricketer? GreenCricket (talk) 14:19, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Side info on Google is always for the search term, and it returns the cricketer's personal data along with photos randomly of the cricketer and the actor (as this is how Google algorythm works). But - BUT - Google results are completely irrelevant to a person's notability for Wikipedia - see WP:GOOGLEHITS. kashmiri ^TALK 23:32, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 20:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per WP:NACTOR. MB298 (talk) 01:25, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non notable. Soulseek324 (talk) 22:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC) struck !vote of a sockpuppet - they edited a number of AfD pages in addition to the one the sockpuppetry concerned, aparrently in a bid to make the sockpuppetry less conspicuous. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Turquoisesummer RichardOSmith (talk) 08:10, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete' - not seeing the standard for WP:NACTOR being met, and doesn't pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:50, 2 January 2016 (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.