Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2003 LN6 (talk | contribs) at 05:45, 18 April 2024 (Listing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Winston.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Actors and filmmakers. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Actors and filmmakers|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Actors and filmmakers.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Purge page cache watch
Scan for actor AfDs

Scan for filmmaker AfDs


Actors and filmmakers

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. Editors are encouraged to improve this article. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Winston

Nick Winston (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Zero inline sources in entire article, no evidence of significant notability online. The article is of significant length, but there are few sources and none inline. 2003 LN6 05:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Yes the writing is crummy needing a rewrite but notability is met here. X (talk) 13:16, 28 April 2024 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tonya Suzanne Holly

Tonya Suzanne Holly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete: non-notable director/producer. Per IMDb, only accomplishments are When I Find the Ocean (2006) and The Mirror (2003). Other stuff (since 2012) still "in development". Nirva20 (talk) 01:34, 18 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 14:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anamor

Anamor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article, created in 2013, lacks significant coverage from reliable sources in the intervening years. Southati (talk) 12:34, 17 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 14:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scilla Sclanizza

Scilla Sclanizza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any reliable sources, does not pass WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. Southati (talk) 11:45, 17 April 2024 (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.
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. plicit 14:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simona Lisi

Simona Lisi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot find any reliable sources, does not pass WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. Southati (talk) 11:08, 17 April 2024 (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.
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. plicit 11:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Van Doren

Adam Van Doren (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable and possibly a promotional page for the subject. Most of the article is about the subject's notable family (covered in other Wikipedia entries). Sources confirm that the subject is painter but not one whose work is widely-known or award-winning. Pprsmv (talk) 08:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Aye, there's a whole lot of fluff here; over half the text in the article is who the subject's related to, to whom he's married, that notable people once owned his studio, etc etc etc. Strip away all the dross and refbombing, and this guy's just another painter and non-notable junior academic. Ravenswing 18:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete notability is not inherited. A line about a grandson in one of the other family articles seems to be the right amount of information for the current position. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 10:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The article does not specifically focus on the subject and tries to show notability by mentioning other people's names.Southati (talk) 12:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No news coverage specifically on the subject. Agree with above arguments. Perfectstrangerz (talk) 01:56, 19 April 2024 (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.
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. plicit 11:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Warren

Josh Warren (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE on this unfootnoted article about an actor and director, and not found anything to add. I don't think he meets WP:GNG or WP:ACTOR. Tacyarg (talk) 09:32, 15 April 2024 (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.
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. Randykitty (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manoj Tiwari (film director)

Manoj Tiwari (film director) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Came here to remove a reference that falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA and found that out of all the references on the page, only one would be considered reliable and it is about a film, not in-depth about the director. An online search founding nothing better. CNMall41 (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Uttar Pradesh. WCQuidditch 04:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete: Although some of their later works appear to be notable, they themselves don't seem to have garnered much media attention, based on the sources of the article at least. The sources discuss about his work (film reviews), but the articles focus is not him. Obviously, sources about a film director will definitely discuss their work, but to meet notability, some of the sources need to focus mainly on the subject, then discussing their works. This is not the case here. So, delete for now. X (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect so we can deal with the constant attempts to remove that redirect?? No thanks. If redirect is an acceptable WP:ATD I would recommend protecting the title from creation. Also, welcome to Wikipedia. Strange you found AfD so quickly with only your third edit. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Curious which references you feel count towards notability that do not fall under NEWSORGINDIA.--CNMall41 (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails notability. The director has not made a remarkable or significant achievement, enough to deserve attention. A search on his name would bring up more result on different Manoj Tiwari, a politician. The sources on the page do not have coverage on the director himself to pass WP:BIO. RangersRus (talk) 13:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Fails WP:GNG, there are no much reliable secondary sources found where the subject got in-depth coverage. Grabup (talk) 07:31, 22 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arshad Adnan

Arshad Adnan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of an actor and film producer, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for actors or film producers. This was speedy deleted in March for not properly sourcing a strong notability claim, and was then recreated just over a week ago -- but the notability claim isn't stronger or better-sourced than the first time.
Two of the eight footnotes are just redundant reduplication of two of the others, so there are really only six distinct sources -- but four of them are just here to verify his family relationships to other notable people, rather than to demonstrate his notability, and of the just two sources that link him to film, one just briefly namechecks his existence without being about him in any non-trivial sense. Which leaves just one source that's actually contributing any WP:GNG points, but that's not enough.
As always, neither actors nor film producers get automatic notability freebies just because their work exists -- and notability is not inherited, so he isn't automatically entitled to an article just because of who his parents are, either -- but the article claims nothing about him that would be "inherently" notable at all, and isn't sourced anywhere near well enough to get him over GNG. Bearcat (talk) 17:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Don’t think he is notable for now. Sources are just passing mentiones and not claiming notablity. Grabup (talk) 06:28, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× 20:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confused A search finds his name in some reliable sources. However, there are discussions about his films or dramas, rather than about him personally. Ontor22 (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: He might meet Wikipedia's notability requirement under Socialite Category and Sustained Category.Crampcomes (talk) 00:18, 23 April 2024 (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.

Mehr Hassan

Mehr Hassan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:Notability Wikibear47 (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Has been in multiple films that seem to have wikipedia articles of their own. As per: WP:ARTIST, criteria 3, that should probably be enough.
also, seems like this is the 3rd nomination. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 17:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Dance, Music, Fashion, Pakistan, Punjab, and Kentucky. WCQuidditch 18:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The newspapers used now in the article for sourcing are all there is for this person; I don't see notability beyond the local level. I can't find any mention of them otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The fact she has been seen on multiple movies which has a wikipedia page doesn't qualify her to have a wikipedia page. This is just like the case of Lucy Grantham (2nd nomination). The subject Mehr Hassan fails WP:GNG. Her first AFD which was keep was just a two vote of keep which was still saying because she appeared in a movie. No independent reliable source, No award won or being nominated as an actress or dancer. I really don't see anything notable. --Meligirl5 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with significant roles in multiple notable films. The Louisville Courier article too makes a case for notability. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does having just one reliable source qualifies a person of having a Wikipedia page?

Hassan started her dancing career as a stage performer in the United States.

How do we believe such statement with no reliable source.?--Meligirl5 (talk) 00:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep. WP:NACTOR appears to hold here for now, although perhaps the articles for the films she starred should be reviewed for their notability. The bottom line is that long as those films are notable, she is, if barely. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 16:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm familiar with a "Soft Delete" but can anyone define a "Soft Keep" for me? Do you mean "Weak Keep"?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 11:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The subject's claim of appearing in numerous films lacks verifiable evidence, thus failing to meet WP:ARTISTS. The available coverage appears to be routine per WP:ROTM and lacks the depth required by WP:GNG. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 15:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Courier-Journal article wasn't routine, and by what sources we have, Hassan was in these films, noting that the sourcing of the related film articles was light (thus my 'Weak Keep'). I suspect however that her appearance in some of them was exaggerated to make it appear she was a lead when she wasn't. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 16:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as no evidence of any notability, The Courier-Journal is great however unfortunately it's no where near enough to establish notability, Not sure if her roles have been major or minor but either way I cannot find any evidence of any notability, Fails NACTOR and GNG. –Davey2010Talk 15:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:NACTOR says "The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films" and we know she was in several notable films (i.e., films with articles). If you're saying the subject fails NACTOR, are you saying these linked films should be reviewed in AfD? Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 16:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But NACTOR states The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films which I can't see reflected here. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The "Partial filmography" in the article links to five notable films (currently adjudged by Wikipedia) and I suppose it's our opinion as to whether her roles were significant in them. It's part of why I say "Weak Keep" as I don't want to overjudge. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 17:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's hard to say whether she fails NACTOR #1 but personally I would say she does and despite the The Courier-Journal link imho she still fails #2 too, FWIW all of her roles could've been one-bit/minor roles so article linkage doesn't mean anything here, (and leading on to your last point nicely) There's just not enough info to determine whether she meets NACTOR #1 or not but either way I would obviously say she still fails #2, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 17:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In NACTOR, it says #1 or #2. The subject doesn't have to meet both criteria to pass it. I accept that we would need to judge whether the roles are significant but as it was difficult, source-wise, to drill down on these films, I don't want to rush to judgment, thus my "Weak Keep". I still say the key here is to look at the film articles and see if they should be kept. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 17:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've checked the articles and their sources as well as looked online - The Gold Bracelet is just about notable with the rest not being notable so imho one notable film and one notable paper cite is still not enough irrespective of what role she played, I guess the article can be redirected to The Gold Bracelet if really desired,
    You're more than welcome to search for these films for yourself and judge for yourself, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for welcoming me to do something I've already done. :) So, if only one film is notable, why do the others have articles? (can be taken as a rhetorical question) Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 17:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome. If you've searched these articles before now then why the fuck are you here questioning their notability ?. Go nominate them if you think they're not notable.
    Because get this Stefen - some articles go undetected and unnoticed, ever thought about that ?, I suspect not :). –Davey2010Talk 18:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also for future reference go read WP:BLUDGEON. You've !voted keep so as such you don't need to reply to every single delete !vote regurgitating the same line again and again. –Davey2010Talk 18:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a discussion, and it is eminently reasonable to challenge a position. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 18:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see the need for you to be cross with me here. I have been professional and I expect the same in return. The fact that the articles exist show that they are currently presented as notable subjects, whether they deserve this determination or not. I may well prod the articles in question, but for the time-being, they cannot be dismissed. Stefen Towers among the rest! GabGruntwerk 18:09, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No indication of significance. Fails WP:NACTOR. Perhaps WP:TOOSOON, but there nothing here to indicate a pass on WP:SIGCOV. scope_creepTalk 12:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. plicit 14:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre Gervois

Pierre Gervois (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pretty random artist; article authored by a suspected paid editor. Biruitorul Talk 15:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: in general sources of WP:YOUTUBE are not notable and usable except under specific criteria. most sources are not independent of author. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I found one detailed source about the subject:
    1. Sawyer, Matthew Lee (2022). Make It in America: How International Companies and Entrepreneurs Can Successfully Enter and Scale in U.S. Markets. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. pp. 55–56. ISBN 978-1-119-88514-6. Retrieved 2024-04-13 – via Google Books.

      The book provides 664 words of coverage about the subject. The book notes: "Pierre Gervois is an artist, author, teacher, and entrepreneur. He grew up in a conservative, traditional French family in Paris. When Pierre told his parents that he wanted to study modern art, they insisted he pursue a more predictable career in business, law, or engineering. He followed their wishes, earning a master's degree in political science and constitutional law at Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris. Unknown to them, though, during those years he also created 500 paintings and drawings."

      The book notes: "In addition to his entrepreneurial venture, Pierre rekindled his passion for art. With downtime during the 2020 pandemic, he created a website to show his paintings, drawings, and digital artwork. Within six weeks, he sold five pieces. The website also caught the attention of a New York City art gallery that wanted to exhibit his work."

    If there was one more good source, then Pierre Gervois would meet the notability guideline. The other sources I found were passing mentions or quotes from him in the media.

    Cunard (talk) 00:09, 14 April 2024 (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.
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. Star Mississippi 02:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rani Hazarika (singer)

Rani Hazarika (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previously deleted at Rani Hazarika. She's sung a few more songs since then but I see no real new evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 15:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and Assam. WCQuidditch 16:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm not seeing any significant coverage except for pieces which are pretty obviously intended to be promotional, whether promoting her or the industry in general. I haven't found any honest neutral coverage, and that suggests GNG is not met. Basically the same concerns as the original discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've found substantial coverage of the artist in reputable media outlets few of them are like [1] [2] and recent once [3], which I firmly believe meets the notability criteria. While some articles may seem promotional, it's common for media houses to highlight positives when interviewing artists and they most of the times don't keep the view point neutral. Let's discuss further to ensure a balanced perspective. Rainylights (talk) 04:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While some of the projects she had helped to provide tracks stand on Wikipedia, I don't see her currently passing WP:GNG. All I find are just press releases that fail to provide any significant coverage of the subject.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I respectfully disagree with the proposal to delete Rani Hazarika's article. While I understand the concerns raised about potential promotional content, I believe there are sufficient neutral sources to establish her notability. Hazarika's contributions to the music industry, including her involvement in various projects and collaborations, have been documented in reputable sources beyond mere press releases. Moreover, her continued activity in the field since the previous deletion discussion indicates ongoing relevance. Therefore, I argue that the article should be kept, as it meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion.Rainylights (talk) 08:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a useless platitude that misunderstands the reason for deletion entirely and appears to be AI-generated. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Dear Pppery,
    In addition to your baseless accusations, I'd like to highlight that I can see, two articles published—one in the Times of India [4]and another in Nework KNT [5] —both praising the artist in question. It's worth noting that I have no affiliation with either publication. These articles further affirm the importance of the artist's work, casting doubt on the deletion of the Wikipedia article. I await a thoughtful response.
    Previously, you placed a Speedy deletion tag on the article, which was later declined by the checker User/Administrator User:Ivanvector, citing legitimate reasoning G4: not substantially identical (CSDH).
    Now, resorting to an AFD is like digging a well in the desert while knowing there is no water Rainylights (talk) 04:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    More AI-generated nonsense. The Times of India is useless for establishing notability. The Network KNT source, is, despite heaping praise on the subject, not actually WP:SIGCOV and I'm not convinced it's a reliable source either. Now, resorting to an AFD is like digging a well in the desert while knowing there is no water -> huh? I'm not following your analogy at all. The only thing that could mean is that I somehow knew this AfD was doomed to fail and was disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, and if you're really accusing me of that you need much stronger evidence for it. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While doing preliminary research, the articles and links that show up in google, even though most are press releases about different song releases and events she has been part of, but the articles happen to be published by some of the largest Newspapers and Portals in the country, like Times of India[6],[7], ANI [8], Hindustan Times [9], Financial Express [10], Deccan Chronicle [11] and India Today, The Print, IBTimes [12] among others, some mentioning her as a sensation and others speaking in similar words, while a number of portals carry her interviews and achievements and contributions, suggesting she is very well known. Hope the attached links help in arriving at better clarity about the decision. Hjeelani (talk) 09:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From a very quick glance, you have cites to The Times of India, which is useless for establishing notability. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Closer look. Cites 1, 2, and 4 are useless as explained above. Cite 5 is not significant coverage, and cite 7 is reporting on a non-notable award mill, therefore also useless. Given the lack of any byline and such I'm not convinced cite 6 is a reliable source. For Cite 3 see WP:RSPANI - it's not a reliable source. Also keep in mind Paid news in India when trying to establish the notability of India-related topics. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (These comments are based on the numbering as of when I originally posted the comment, further discussion above has shifted the reference numbers slightly) * Pppery * it has begun... 04:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may check her new song 'Wallah Habibi Arabic" from current Bollywood Movie "Bade Miyan Chote Miyan" [13] Rainylights (talk) 03:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So? That's just more puff from The Times of India and of no value in establishing notability at all. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Doesn't pass GNG with SIGCOV or NMUSIC or NARTIST. Most cites used are TOI that are not reliable for BLP and no notability outside one song. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    She's Notable singer , It's worth noting that having 100 articles about an artist isn't necessarily the only measure of their significance. Reviewing the tabulation in the article with all sources might provide a clearer picture of her level of notability to you.
    Additionally, her impact extends beyond just one song and encompasses multiple works, as evidenced not only by coverage in TOI but also in numerous other reputable portals.Its not just a one song but, multiple and its not just TOI but, many other articles from reputed portals and she does pass GNG with SIGCOV . Rainylights (talk) 14:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP. May not be amongst top singers but notable one. This, this, this, this and this covers the needful for WP:GNG per WP:THREE. --Twinkle1990 (talk) 03:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those sources are: a repeat from above, not significant coverage, not significant coverage, unclear why this article without even a byline would be a reliable source, "partnered content" which I would assume means paid promotion of some sort especially given its tone. And the Asian Age source is probably just more paid news in India given the tone its written in. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery sigh! You asked for WP:RS and I gave. The Asian Age is paid? Such a shame. If so, I must say, WP:RS is really debacle forever.
    If this AfD results out here, then outcome should be same. Twinkle1990 (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you really think a supposedly independent source would write things like As the name suggests Rani Hazarika is a voice with thousand attributes? And your AfD link is WP:OTHERSTUFF and not even a very convincing OTHERSTUFF, since I see no relationship at all between this AfD and that one other than that both are about musicians. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Asian Age is WP:RS per consensus.
    Next to it, Times of India is not non-reliable but "reliability matter on the contributor of the topic.", which means notable jpu8rnalist's writing in Times of India are always reliable. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Asian Age is WP:RS per consensus. -> per consensus where? It's not on WP:RSP or WP:NPPSG where I would expect such a source to be documented.
    The issue with The Times of India isn't reliability per se, it's that it is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage, which makes it completely useless for establishing notability as all having an article in The Times of India proves is that you paid them, not an assessment of independent worth. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Subject seems to be notable. Maybe I guess some works needs to be done on the article but I don't think deleting is a good option.--Meligirl5 (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How, exactly, does the subject seem to be notable? Do you have any refutation to my analysis of any of the sources above? If you don't substantiate your opposition to deletion it will be completely ignored by the closing admin. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From some of the newspaper seen. She seems to be notable but I can't say if the article needs to be keep because her case looks confusing to me. That is why I said the article needs to be improved and maybe if not deleted can be sent back to draft and has to pass through the WP:AFCREVIEW.--Meligirl5 (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is she notable in a way that meets Wikipedia criteria? That does not appear to be the case, although I can see why she is known in certain circles. Vacosea (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Not notable as of now TheChronikler7 (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your Verdict feels like a final judgement from the supreme court judge. made without considering the arguments presented by the advocates or the significance of artist involved. Rainylights (talk) 13:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Irrational! !vote. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.awazthevoice.in/india-news/assam-s-popular-singer-rani-hazarika-says-she-found-singing-in-kashmiri-difficult-20529.html
  2. ^ https://www.apnnews.com/rani-hazarika-a-melodious-journey-of-a-versatile-playback-singer-and-live-performer/#google_vignette
  3. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/bade-miyan-chote-miyan-rani-hazarika-receives-applause-for-her-song-wallah-habibi/articleshow/109273863.cms
  4. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/bade-miyan-chote-miyan-rani-hazarika-receives-applause-for-her-song-wallah-habibi/articleshow/109273863.cms
  5. ^ https://networkknt.com/2024/04/rani-hazarika-strikes-gold-once-again-wallah-habibi-arabic-version-from-bade-miyan-chote-miyan-sets-the-arab-world-ablaze/
  6. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/rani-hazarika-and-jaan-nissar-lones-melodies-enchant-the-spectacular-bangus-festival/articleshow/103696182.cms
  7. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/rani-hazarika-mesmerises-with-her-song-mystic-trance-at-the-russian-african-forum/articleshow/102139001.cms
  8. ^ https://www.aninews.in/news/business/business/international-sensation-rani-hazarika-and-jaan-nissar-lones-melodies-enchant-the-spectacular-bangus-festival20230915172818/#google_vignette
  9. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/rani-hazarika-and-jaan-nissar-lones-melodies-enchant-the-spectacular-bangus-festival/articleshow/103696182.cms
  10. ^ https://www.financialexpress.com/lifestyle/amid-freezing-temperature-kashmir-hosts-bollywood-rubaru-concert/2178194/
  11. ^ https://www.deccanchronicle.com/in-focus/051219/rani-hazarika-the-rockstar-from-assam.html
  12. ^ https://www.ibtimes.co.in/dadasaheb-phalke-excellence-award-2018-heres-complete-winners-list-767405
  13. ^ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/music/news/bade-miyan-chote-miyan-rani-hazarika-receives-applause-for-her-song-wallah-habibi/articleshow/109273863.cms
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.
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 and WP:SALT as a title-gaming recreation of a previously salted page. Any editor proficient with regex is welcome to add the title to our blacklist. Owen× 14:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sanket Mhatre (voice actor)

Sanket Mhatre (voice actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was previously deleted and salted at Sanket Mhatre/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanket Mhatre and was recreated by a sock. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Our subject does not meet the notability criteria set down by WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST.
Forensics on sources: We have an extensive list of voice actors, which name-drops our subject; this article about something else, titled "How dubbed versions of Hollywood hits are churning out heroes," in which, again, the name of our subject is mentioned; a promotional piece on a commercial website that uses our subject in its video games; a couple of interviews, here and there, which, per se, do not support notability; more irrelevancies, such as this; and so on. The fact that the article has been created by an account indefinitely blocked for using multiple odious socks does not help. -The Gnome (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 12:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adeseha Wuraola Becky

Adeseha Wuraola Becky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An article about a Nigerian actress, filmmaker, Philanthropist and a business woman that doesn't meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines and WP:NACTOR. The actress has appeared in non notable films and has neither lead any role or praised for that role in any film per WP:BEFORE. Gross case of WP:LOTSOFSOURCES: the sources seems to bear interview natures like "she said", "I did abortion", etc and doesn't mean WP:SIGCOV. Sideway drive of promotional clauses ! Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:41, 12 April 2024 (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.
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. Closing as keep per consensus. Page move can discussed, if required, in article talk page, outside AfD. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nitin Dubey (singer)

Nitin Dubey (singer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:REFBOMBed with sources of unclear reliability and significance. Almost identical to content previously deleted and salted at Nitin Dubey * Pppery * it has begun... 18:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I read the English language sources and they satisfy GNG. I've no reason to believe the non-English wouldn't check out making this person highly notable. The proper name page needs unsalting, the original salt took place 12 years ago and the world moves on. Desertarun (talk) 19:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: and Move to Nitin Dubey (due to unnecessary disambiguator). - Meets GNG with a bunch of secondary sources that are independent, reliable, and provide SIGCOV. In relation previous article that was deleted in 2012, all of the sources have been published since then. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:48, 2 May 2024 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) Desertarun (talk) 21:09, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruben Muradyan (ballet dancer)

Ruben Muradyan (ballet dancer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Repost of content previously deleted and salted at Ruben Muradyan * Pppery * it has begun... 16:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep- appears well sourced/ meets WP:N. Archives908 (talk) 19:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Care to elaborate on how it's well sourced? Can you read Armenian? Or are you just saying this should be kept based on a cursory glance. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep They've won awards before such as the Honored Artist of Armenia, which can constitute under WP:ANYBIO. Noorullah (talk) 00:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there any evidence that Honored Artist of Armenia qualifies as a well-known and significant award or honor? If it truly were one then presumably its article would be more than a tiny stub. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is awarded by the president of Armenia. One nation bestowing significance through an award seems to fit the definition for WP:ANYBIO in my eyes. [7] It can also be something seen as of "historic" value now being a historic award, as it seems Armenia possibly does not give out these awards anymore? [8] @Pppery Noorullah (talk) 03:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep several articles are already present on the page such as aysor.am.Shinadamina (talk) 05:40, 30 April 2024 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lambert Hamel

Lambert Hamel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't establish that he meets WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 17:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep looks like more or less a straight translation from German WP. I'm willing to defer to their judgment. Carrite (talk) 10:22, 25 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 14:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Minardi

Marc Minardi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about an actor, and added a reference, but cannot see significant coverage which would meet WP:GNG. His strongest claim to notability as an actor is his role as the friend of the protagonist in Ace Lightning, but I do not think this meets WP:NACTOR. Tacyarg (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Canada. Tacyarg (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As always, actors are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist — the notability test doesn't hinge on listing acting roles, it hinges on showing WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about them and their performances. But the only footnote here isn't enough all by itself, and I've had about as much luck finding more as the nominator did. Bearcat (talk) 00:28, 13 April 2024 (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.
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. North America1000 05:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Hereford

Henry Hereford (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this article about an actor, and added a reference to his employer's website; but cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources, and do not think he meets WP:NACTOR. Tacyarg (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not an article for deletion - definitely meets the criteria for actor. Multiple credits in major film and tv shows. 2600:1700:4640:E70:ECCA:5D5:421E:ECB4 (talk) 13:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean by "employer". Henry is an established actor having been on several films and TV shows as referenced in IMDB and trade magazines. There is no reason this page would be deleted. Thefilmsorcerer (talk) 22:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Desertarun (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails GNG or NACTOR. A 21st-century actor and yet yields no results in Google News tells a lot. General searches also did not produce anything of use. Other than 1-2, the used refs aren't about him rather the films/shows he's starred in. X (talk) 05:05, 28 April 2024 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) ToadetteEdit! 12:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Filmfare Award Bangla for Best Supporting Actress

Filmfare Award Bangla for Best Supporting Actress (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No independent sourcing. FilmfraeFilmfare awards is owned by The Times Group, disqualifying both ET and TOI. Sohom (talk) 12:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by independent sourcing? Citations are from official site of Filmfare, why is it not permissible? Sahajitbro (talk) 17:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that to attest of notability of the award, independent sources are needed. For verification, they should, however, be permissible imv (if the page is kept or redirected). (note; tiny typo in the rationale that you might want to fix Filmfrae-->Filmfare (as it is a key word, in case someone copy-pastes it).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sahajitbro Take a lookWP:INDEPENDENT. You need to have independent coverage to show notability, not coverage from official potentially biased sources. Sohom (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Questions: 1) what about coverage such as this or this or this for example? 2) if the award itself is judged insufficiently covered, would you consider a redirect to Filmfare Awards? Thank you.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mushy Yank All of those sources are classic examples of WP:CHURNALISM. 2 and 3 are effectively parroting press releases. 1 might be debatably reliable, however it is very short and does not constitute sustained in-depth coverage. No opposition to a redirect. Sohom (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also noting that this was originally a contested BLAR. Sohom (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per WP:SPLIT from the main article. Has reliable sources coverage as shown during this discussion, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:48, 18 April 2024 (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.
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. plicit 12:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Greaves-Neal

Ben Greaves-Neal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have carried out WP:BEFORE for this actor, and cannot find reliable sources to add. The article has been tagged as an unreferenced BLP since December 2023. I do not think he meets WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Tacyarg (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aditi Vats

Aditi Vats (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not pass GNG or NACTOR. Has had no significant roles in the mentioned films. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Television, Fashion, India, and Rajasthan. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no major roles in films. Fails WP:GNG and none of the cited sources cover the subject in depth. I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG.--Tumbuka Arch (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Poor and unreliable sources. Fails WP:NACTOR. The actress is not well-known who has played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work that has been the primary subject of multiple independent articles and reviews. Fails notability. RangersRus (talk) 13:33, 11 April 2024 (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.
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. While it could be argued that this discussion should be closed as No consensus I find the new accounts who popped up to argue for Deletion more than a little suspicious. AFD is not a place that new editors find on their first few days editing. Plus those editors arguing to Keep this article are AFD regulars I trust. Liz Read! Talk! 06:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alisha Newton

AfDs for this article:
Alisha Newton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not yet notable per WP:ENTERTAINER or WP:NACTOR. None of the cited sources are considered reliable. I am unable to find enough coverage of the subject to meet WP:ENT/WP:GNG— Preceding unsigned comment added by Raqib Sheikh (talkcontribs) 00:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm ok if it gets !deleted as well, I didn't see coverage that I'd use to build an article. Oaktree b (talk) 18:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If that is so, would you please recommend deletion for this article in this talk page. For some reason, this AFD hasn't produced much discussion as of yet and I'm not sure how Wikipedia will deal with such nomination whose discussion page doesn't even have one recommendation. Raqib Sheikh (talk) 11:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No reliable sources or coverages to build an article. Izzac Leiberheir (talk) 03:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I have also looked into the article and I frankly agree with the nomination. Couldn't find a single reference from a reliable source. Ashik Rahik (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Most of the sources if not all were based on a notable film. I was also thinking of the nominations when WP:ACTOR said, "multiple and lead roles". I became skeptic if her roles in the films other than Heartland (inclusively too). But the film.is notable and she was much credited for it. I have no other option that this meets notability guidelines.Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 02:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Passes WP:NACTOR has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. Theroadislong (talk) 07:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Theroadislong, appearing in multiple films without verifiability doesn't meet notability. Besides, almost all the sources were centralized to reviews or mention of her on the film, Heartland and remember, that isn't significant coverages. While Wikipedia is not perfect, redirect seems to work here per her acting non or less lead roles. Unless the article has been covered for playing a particular role in two or more films (considered notable per WP:NFILM), it should be kept, if not —redirect per WP:ATD. — Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:08, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus currently seems split between redirect and delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 13:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the sources here look good enough. And here's another one from a major newspaper in 2013. A decade of media coverage! And really, 10 seasons in a major national TV series - I'm not sure why we are here. Nfitz (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you sure the sources are reliable? Because they don't seem reliable to me, as per Wikipedia's reliable source list: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources - Wikipedia. None of the cited sources within the article are on the list. And as per my knowledge about Wikipedia, when an article does not have reliable sources as references, which is when some or at least one these sources is not cited, then there's a big reason to delete the article. Raqib Sheikh (talk) 05:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you really suggesting, User:Raqib Sheikh that a 120-year old Postmedia broadsheet is not a reliable source? That list came about to document bad sources. The Toronto Star - the largest newspaper in the nation, and the paper of record in Toronto isn't there as well. Neither is The Gazette - the largest English-language paper in Quebec. Would you discount those? Their lack of presence on that list simply indicates no one has ever felt a need to question it! Nfitz (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Keep Believe it satisfies WP:GNG MaskedSinger (talk) 05:39, 2 May 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 23:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anubha Sourya Sarangi

Anubha Sourya Sarangi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Salt evasion of Anubha Sourya. Sources are mostly about individual movies without significant coverage of the actress herself. No real evidence of notability * Pppery * it has begun... 16:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. I cannot find sourcing to satisfy notability requirements. Open to re-evaluating if some are found. —Sirdog (talk) 05:47, 19 April 2024 (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.
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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arbaaz Ali Khan

Arbaaz Ali Khan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I may be missing it due to language barriers, but I couldn't find sources to establish that he meets WP:ENT / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 16:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep surprised see this AfD. Notable actor, may not be very popular. Article do lst several filmography. RationalPuff (talk) 22:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Delete mixed up with his namesake. Non-notable actor.RationalPuff (talk) 22:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:NACTOR. The only allegation of notability is that he's related to two other actors. It's refreshing to see that Hollywood is not the only acting world with nepotism. His roles are supporting roles (NOT Lord Krishna, and buried deep in a cast of dozens) or throwaway characters. Bearian (talk) 18:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing notability standards Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failed WP:GNG as well as without any references Pinakpani (talk) 11:50, 2 May 2024 (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.
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. plicit 14:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carlo Lacana

Carlo Lacana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

If kept, this may need TNT'ing as it does seem promotional in places. Long-time unreferenced BLP - lots of roles, working actor, but i couldn't find the sources to show he meets WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 16:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion due to previous AFD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:55, 24 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 03:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dedrick D. Gobert

Dedrick D. Gobert (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although he was memorable for his collaborations with John Singleton, none of his roles are significant enough per WP:NACTOR. The Film Creator (talk) 13:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:17, 16 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 03:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nils Wetterholm

Nils Wetterholm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:MUSICIAN or WP:ACTOR. zoglophie•talk• 10:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:16, 16 April 2024 (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.
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 find Safari Scribe's two contributions the most persuasive here. There's enough sentiment for deletion to form a consensus, and some decent policy-oriented opposition to at least one of the keep !votes to allow that consensus to be strong enough to delete. The potential AtD of a merge/redirect was similarly reasonably objected to and therefore isn't open to me as a closer. Daniel (talk) 03:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Dreyfuss

Ben Dreyfuss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per discussion on the talk page, I believe this article on Ben Dreyfuss should be deleted. I have searched for meaningful second-party references to his career or body of work and am coming up short -- he does not seem to be notable as either a creative professional or writer. As far as I can tell, his most significant mentions are minor social media disputes. This article has, as far as I can tell, never included appropriate references and has at times leaned on inappropriate references (ie, personal LinkedIn or Facebook pages). The only current reference is an article about Richard Dreyfuss, not his son Ben.

Since being related to a famous person by itself confers no notability (WP:BIOFAMILY), I think Ben Dreyfuss fails the notability check on his own. Geethree (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 April 6. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 14:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Journalism, and United States of America. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 14:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft keep There are a handful of reliable sources with significant coverage of Ben (not just his father). See here, here, here, here, here, here. I'd say it's just over the threshold for notability but I can see how someone would make a different judgment call. P.S. If the AfD consensus is to delete this article, Emily Dreyfuss should probably go through AfD as well on similar grounds. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dclemens1971, I looked at the above sources you presented especially the first and second, which are simply interviews about a family. Others seems also though I didn't continued since first matters. Also we don't say because this person isn't notable, we should go for an article that has nothing to do with this AFD. Remember that journalists are taken to pass entry not only for the interviews they go always, but for coverage of them on a particular writing or style. If we should use those sources which are interviews per WP:INTERVIEW, then, we are incorporating unverifiable source—they says everything about them. — Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 09:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      WP:INTERVIEWS highlights the tension in using interviews for verifiability/notability, but the manual of style makes clear that interviews that are conducted by reliable journalistic outlets with robust editorial standards (like NPR, Politico, and NBC) can be considered for use. EDITED TO ADD: I acknowledge that it's a matter of discretion and judgment and that's why my rating remains a soft/weak keep. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - He was the editorial director of Mother Jones (magazine) which would possibly not be enough in itself, but is not chopped liver, here he is being interviewed strictly about that. Between that and the various things DClemens mentions above, it should be enough. --GRuban (talk) 03:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • GRuban, I just want to drive in: being such a writer of such magazines is not notability. I will also say you'do read it analyse the source per SE! — Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 09:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Per above! Cleanup and sourcing. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 00:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: An article about an individual that doesn't meet the general notability guidelines for a journalist and actor. For WP:JOURNALIST, the article were less/not supported by any reliable source. Primarily, covering news is not same as you covered in news. The question is, has his writing influenced any style, time, etc like a normal writer? has his journalism been covered per WP:SIGCOV or for a particular incident. The answer per WP:BEFORE is "no". Appearing on few films not as lead doesn't mean the person is notable per WP:NACTOR, there are more or less sources to verify he was cast if not databases like IMDb, etc. While I have analysed this article doesn't meet our notability guidelines for an entry. Likewise the imitator, there is a case of WP:BIOFAMILY, as the article percent were sources from his family, his father, who was a notable actor. In my researches, almost if not all the sources were about his father lining a bit of the son, so, this is a case of WP:INHERITED. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 07:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – At this stage, I would delete and add whatever to Richard's page. If over time, he becomes more notable, he may justify his own article. This isn't now. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    To me, slightly fleshing out Richard's page (and deleting this one) seems like the clear solution here. Most of the links provided above are all about Ben in relation to his father, not about Ben per se. If that is the eventual consensus, I'm happy to make those updates myself. Geethree (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    MaskedSinger, there is nothing to add here. Neither going for 23 eye surgeries nor being born by notable parents (WP:INHERITED) doesn't mean we should redirect or merge. Tis article is credibly have no context, sources that analysed his characters or directing, any award?, what cognitive impact he has made. I don't see much of his parents role here . As a matter of fact, let's judge it in it's own accord! — Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:54, 27 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 00:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rayyanza Malik Ahmad

Rayyanza Malik Ahmad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another case of WP:INVALIDBIO. Child's notability is solely attributed to their parent, and it's highly unlikely for a two-year-old to have achieved notable accomplishments. Ckfasdf (talk) 09:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 13 April 2024 (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.
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. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ataska Mercado

Ataska Mercado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not yet notable per WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:NACTOR or WP:MUSICBIO. In a WP:BEFORE search I could find no significant coverage in reliable sources, apart from this review in the Manila Standard. Being a non-winning contestant on a reality TV series seems to be her main claim to fame, and her film and music careers haven't really taken off yet. WP:TOOSOON at best. Wikishovel (talk) 09:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Vivamax app background and reach here:
https://www.manilatimes.net/2021/08/25/entertainment-lifestyle/show-times/vivamax-hits-600000-subscribers-no-1-on-google-play-in-first-six-months/1812190/amp
See below references of her notable vivamax app movies performances:
https://www.pep.ph/pepalerts/cabinet-files/175244/vivamax-stars-joey-reyes-a734-20230816?s=d765687h8kgrf9g0km65269jeu
https://journalnews.com.ph/ataska-leaves-wholesome-image-for-a-dream/
See references below that must be used as motable instead of the voice kids but it made her a household name ehich is often referenced as the start of her career (see here as one of the many: https://mb.com.ph/2022/10/17/audiojunkie-sarah-geronimo-as-disco-queen-ataska-kyle-raphael-adda-cstr-chrstn-chelsea-ronquillo-and-the-real-kushin-drop/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.29.97.141 (talk) 09:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with those sources you've cited, like the ones cited in the article, is that they're either unreliable news blogs or only passing mentions in WP:Reliable sources. What's needed is significant coverage in reliable WP:Secondary sources to show notability. Wikishovel (talk) 09:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a reliable source as an active showbiz personality in the Philippines: http://www.vivaartistsagency.ph/project/ataska/
Pxsheng25 (talk) 09:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for logging back in. It's a reliable source, but not a WP:Secondary source. Wikishovel (talk) 09:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See this: https://www.viberate.com/artist/ataska/
Other article that make her recognizble is under her birth name ATASCHA CHLOE MERCADO:
https://lifestyle.inquirer.net/230110/whats-with-annie-being-staged-in-manila-in-18-year-intervals/amp/
120.29.97.141 (talk) 09:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please log back in. viberate.com is unreliable, and the inquirer.net reference is a passing mention. I hope you now see the pattern. Rather than posting references here, you're welcome to improve the article. Wikishovel (talk) 09:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will help improve the article
Kuyacontributor (talk) 10:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changes now applied to improve the page and claim notability
Kuyacontributor (talk) 07:22, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. References provided above are to Mercado's talent agency which manage and market her career. It therefore lacks indpendence and cannot be considered reliable. No significant coverage found in independent secondary sources. Fails notability criteria.4meter4 (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Meets WP:SIGCOV due to new Known For section on Infobox Kuyacontributor (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC) Kuyacontributor (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep. Link sources below claim notability for this individual which is outside Mercado's talent agency and from verified pages that are part of Wikipedia. Articles below are not a passing mention and from reliable sources news.

Spotify [1] People's Journal [2] Abante [3] Manila Bulletin [4] DWNU [5] Showbiz Unlimited [6] Phoenix14344 (talk) 23:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC) Phoenix14344 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Please note that Spotify is not a WP:Reliable source, nor showbizportal.net (unconnected to Showbiz Unlimited). The journalnews.com.ph and wish1075 sources are short interviews with her, and interviews are a WP:Primary source. The mb.com.ph article mentions her briefly in a weekly singles roundup. Abante is a lurid tabloid: please note that Wikipedia also has articles on sources like the WP:DAILYMAIL and WP:NYPOST, but references from those aren't acceptable sources, especially for WP:Biographies of living persons. Wikishovel (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per pxsheng25 she is an accredited adult film actress in the Philippines.
SWDG 18:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SWDG: can you please explain what you mean by "accredited", and how that makes her notable enough by the Wikipedia guidelines listed in the nomination? Wikishovel (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
by accredited I simply mean that she is known and recognized for her work. I do understand you consider nearly all above sources to be primary or 'passing mentions' however a strong argument could be made that the manila times article referencing VivaMax's success at 600K downloads and being #1 on the play store could be attributed to Ataska's success in her career, thus establishing notability. SWDG 19:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It's true that the editors need to be more selective about reliable sources, and the article could certainly be improved, but that's the point: the article could be improved. It can't be if it's deleted. The AfD lister asked for improvement and it appears to be happening. rspεεr (talk) 18:54, 18 April 2024 (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.
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. Anyone is free to create a redirect if they see it fit. plicit 03:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marnix van den Broeke

Marnix van den Broeke (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Working actor, but doesn't meet WP:NACTOR / WP:GNG. Unref BLP. Boleyn (talk) 17:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on redirecting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:53, 17 April 2024 (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.
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 no consensus‎. (non-admin closure) ToadetteEdit! 03:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Devi

Eva Devi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The two sources listed here (one being a Who's Who) are not enough to establish the diverse coverage WP:GNG, and a quick search finds little on her. Allan Nonymous (talk) 21:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:Keep There is no indication that the nominator has done WP:BEFORE before creating a deletion page [11]. He also lack the ability to understand about Indonesian subject and notability of sources used in the article as he did here in other nomination page that he created [12] [13]. Also there's another sources about the subject [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. 202.43.93.9 (talk) 03:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

202.43.93.9 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Removed per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Allan Nonymous (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The sources in the article along with this and this should be enough for GNG. At the very least, it's very likely that there is SIGCOV in offline sources. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 09:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Additionally, there appears to be SIGCOV of her in this and this. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Devi probably passes NACTOR as well. She starred in Senyum Nona Anna (coverage here), Papa, Mistery in Hongkong, Pulau Putri, Kenapa Kau Pergi and Jurus Maut. She also starred in Mei Lan, Aku Cinta Padamu, which according to this launched the career of Hendra Cipta. It's likely that these films have SIGCOV in offline sources. It's a shame that that's unverifiable though. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 10:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: An article about an Indonesian actress and model with unverifiable notability. On English wiki, every statement must be verifiable by at least a reliable source. Here, the films listed weren't sources and won't count to NACTOR. There has no been any recognition or I influence cited by peer for acting in Indonesia films; infact BEFORE have nothing except existence on books which still commutes non notability per SIGCOV. I won't rather vote for now since I am not used or neither speaks Indonesian language (there may be existing but I have clear doubts because the article I saw on ID Wikipedia cited no source.) This is not also a case of System bias, while I can't find maybe two successive citations to her impact in the 1990's or an interview in the 2000's on her role. On the other hand, I will say delete for now. All the Best! Otuọcha (talk) 10:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:25, 22 April 2024 (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.
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. czar 12:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amelia De La Rama

Amelia De La Rama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This one is sort of on the edge here but, after a search, I found one article (an opinion) online, in addition to the articles here which seem to only make references to her in passing (as the wife of Sukarno). She does seem to notable for appearing in two films but in secondary roles. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is no indication that the nominator has done WP:BEFORE before creating a deletion page [20]. He also lack the ability to understand about Indonesian subject and notability of sources used in the article as he did here in other nomination page that he created [21] [22]. 202.43.93.9 (talk) 03:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
202.43.93.9 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Removed per WP:SOCKSTRIKE
  • Keep: this, this, this and this should be enough for GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's also this, this and this. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I saw these articles during my search, but again, they almost all refer to her in the context of being Sukarno's wife outside of the Philstar article, which has a disclaimer on it that it cannot vouch for the original source (this isn't to say it's bad, but verifying the orginal source, to make sure it isn't paid coverage should probably be done). The three newspaper articles are WP:LOCALCOVERAGE, so I'm not sure they qualify for WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      WP:AUD applies to companies, and requires at least one source that is at least regional in coverage. The articles in the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin should be enough to pass that. The Historia article also discusses her film career. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 22:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The problem here is that these articles again only seem to cover her in the context of being Sukarno's wife, which still doesn't fix the WP:1E issue. You were right on WP:LOCALCOVERAGE tho, I will strike that. Allan Nonymous (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      The Philstar and the Historia articles both discuss her film career, which I feel is enough to show that BLP1E doesn't apply. Additionally, she probably has SIGCOV in offline sources. The Philstar article points to a magazine article from 1956, long before she'd married Sukarno. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 23:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 14:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 17:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Notable as a film actress with multiple roles. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 21:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – Per sources presented above. Svartner (talk) 05:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I see three sources that meet GNG, (Tulsa, Honolulu, and Philstar) - more is presented than just being Sukarno's wife, so not just 1E. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:21, 17 April 2024 (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.
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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 07:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moesa Pancho

Moesa Pancho (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The tempo articles are advertisements, and the rest seem to be largely copies of that advertisement. Hence, seems to fail WP:GNG Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is no indication that the nominator has done WP:BEFORE before creating a deletion page [23]. He also lack the ability to understand about Indonesian subject and notability of sources used in the article as he did here in other nomination page that he created [24] [25]. And there also other notable sources from CNN and a book that was cited in the article [26] [27] 202.43.93.9 (talk) 03:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
202.43.93.9 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Struck per WP:SOCKSTRIKE Allan Nonymous (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:45, 14 April 2024 (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.
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. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 05:41, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Irena Justine

Irena Justine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, most of these sources barely seem to qualify this person as notable. Allan Nonymous (talk) 01:04, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Television, and Indonesia. WCQuidditch 01:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree, the article subject doesn’t meet notability requirements. Nate Higgers (talk) 02:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. And improve with the help of the (WP) pages in Indonesian about her and the films/series she played in, and that seem to show she meets WP:NACTOR although she died young.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. According to WP:NACTOR, the individual must have had substantial roles in various notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. However, the person in question does not meet this requirement, as they have never portrayed lead roles or appeared in notable films. Ckfasdf (talk) 02:57, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems important, and references seem legit. In general, multiple references talking about the subject like this is probably enough to indicate notability. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:*Keep There is no indication that the nominator has done WP:BEFORE before creating a deletion page [28]. He also lack the ability to understand about Indonesian subject and notability of sources used in the article as he did here in other nomination page that he created [29] [30]. 202.43.93.9 (talk) 03:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

202.43.93.9 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
— Struck per WP:SOCKSTRIKE Allan Nonymous (talk) 21:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I added some references from the Indonesian article. I think she had many important roles. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 02:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Subjects who are notable in Indonesia are just as important as subjects who are notable in the US, and article editors are improving the references. rspεεr (talk) 17:50, 18 April 2024 (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.


Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.