Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers

WP:DSACTOR

All deletion discussions relating to filmmakers, directors and other non-actor film-related people should now be listed on this page.

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:

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.
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.

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 other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Actors and filmmakers. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Scan for actor AfDs

Scan for filmmaker AfDs

Actors and filmmakers

Rakesh Varre

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO, WP:NACTOR (with only one significant role in a notable film). The available sources are all tabloid coverage under WP:SBST and/or of questionable reliability under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Repeatedly recreated by UPE/COI editors. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:36, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have more than one significant role in notable productions. Significant does not mean "lead" role only. Did you have his role in Evvarikee Cheppoddu in mind? His role in Badrinath could be considered significant too; and at least a couple of other roles. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; no evidence of notability. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes WP:NACTOR. Just go to Baahubali 2: The Conclusion and ctrl-f his character Sethupathi. He has played negative roles (in films such as Badrinath) which may have garnered more recognition than Evvarikee Cheppoddu.[1] DareshMohan (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zhu Yudong

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

I can’t see any in depth coverage in RIS to indicate that this subject is notable. There may be sources in Chinese I didn’t manage to turn up - if not this article should go. Mccapra (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and China. Mccapra (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have been finding Chinese language sources for this subject, who seems to be a pretty famous director. I haven't yet found any RS that demonstrate individual notability, but I'll look again later today and report my findings or not findings as applicable. Our article is longer than his Baidu page, which seems kinda sus. Folly Mox (talk) 11:24, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benji Krol

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

declined and rejected at WP:AFC but moved to main space, fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 18:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Brazil. Theroadislong (talk) 18:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The author has confirmed a connection with Benji Krol's manager, where they said: its just that i was emailing with krol's manager and i wanted it to be perfect in this comment on their user talk page. Svampesky (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sammy that is something I was not aware of, I just edited the page and moved because the person does have notability. 30 million followers on TikTok is not a low amount in my point of view. But as I said I was not aware of that. And I also have nothing to do with that author just to be clear. Meio2934 (talk) 19:52, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see here TikTok He does have notability in the public. Charlie D’amelio also came from the same source Meio2934 (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The number of TikTok followers has absolutely no influence on notability. Theroadislong (talk) 21:02, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your assertion that TikTok follower count has no bearing on notability, it’s all in perspective, for you someone could have no notability in your eyes. But in someone’s else’s yes. While follower count alone does not define notability in its entirety, it can significantly contribute to a person’s influence and public recognition. For example, individuals like Charli D’Amelio have used her substantial TikTok followings to build successful careers, attract media attention, and secure partnerships with major brands.

Follower count serves as a metric for reach and impact, both of which are essential elements of notability. Meio2934 (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not...please read WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are, not in it’s entirely but they are. Someone can have notability without follower and can also have with it. Meio2934 (talk) 22:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand what you are saying whatsoever, but follower do count as a form of notability. Not enough for a Wikipedia page but it is a form of notability. Meio2934 (talk) 22:09, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly we are discussing notability in Wikipedia terms here! Theroadislong (talk) 22:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: very weak sourcing and major WP:BLP problems. Restricting attention to the best available sources give us a WP:BLP1E situation at best. 100.36.106.199 (talk) 01:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've made an effort to remove the poorly sourced content, including the removal of non-notable names who were accused of crimes, editorializing, original research, and content sourced from user-generated content. The article is a WP:BLP1E as the only reliable sourcing that would establish notability for Krol is about allegations of child sexual misconduct, with one source labelling it sexual assault by saying: accused of sexually assaulting a minor online. As it stands, the article is dangerously close to becoming an WP:ATTACK page. ~~I think this AfD should be withdrawn and the article WP:G10'd.~~ Svampesky (talk) 02:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the ease of administrators viewing this, I think that a comment ending "the article [should be] G10'd" should being "Speedy delete" instead of "Comment" ;). 100.36.106.199 (talk) 12:10, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, because I've !voted above, the comment might look like votestacking. I've striked out the sentence. Svampesky (talk) 14:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see, I missed that -- sorry! 100.36.106.199 (talk) 14:49, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:GNG and is very poorly sourced. And I removed the allegations section per BLP, poor sourcing. We don't include allegations of that nature without high-quality sources. Isaidnoway (talk) 08:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ritobrota Dey

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

Current referencing is all WP:NEWSORGINDIA. A WP:BEFORE finds the same. Coincidentally, the majority is all churnalism from TOI. I would expect other publications to write more about her in-depth if she was notable for the roles. CNMall41 (talk) 18:45, 8 August 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) 18:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: meets WP:NACTOR with at least 2 significant roles in notable production. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of West Bengal-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"May be considered notable...." Can you show the "reliable" sources to prove notability?--CNMall41 (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify On the surface, it seems the TV shows they've been part of are notable-enough, and they've had recurring/starring roles in them, which IMO lets it escape outright deletion - that said, the article in its current state isn't ready for mainspace, per NEWSORGINDIA concerns. Draftify it and let editors find better sourcing. The Kip ^(contribs) 07:45, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: the actor may well be notable but in it's current state the article is not well sourced. With adequete sourcing it might be developed to read less like a directory as well. -- D'n'B-t -- 07:09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:GNG, need indepth coverage. Youknow? (talk) 13:43, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ankush Hazra filmography

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

A mostly unsourced and WP:PROMO WP:CONTENTFORK of Ankush_Hazra#Filmography that is entirely unnecessary due to the reasonable length of the actor's main bio article. A PROD was contested and a redirect was removed; I would be content with either delete or the restoration of a stable redirect to Ankush_Hazra#Filmography. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G5 - only substantial contributions are by Halud Foressa socks. Jdcomix (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Lists, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:43, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ankush Hazra -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and West Bengal. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ellis Rubin (actor)

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

WP:TOOSOON for this actor. One credit in a major film isn't enough to satisfy WP:NACTOR. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

E-Dee

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

I wasn't able to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. The references that are presently used in the article mention him once or twice, at most. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Out the Gate (film), in which he starred. toweli (talk) 18:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Jamaica, United States of America, and California. toweli (talk) 18:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Hunter (actor)

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

WP:BLP of an actor, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NACTOR. As always, the notability test for actors is not satisfied just because the article lists acting roles, and requires the reception of WP:GNG-worthy third-party coverage about him and his roles in reliable sources -- but the referencing here is almost entirely to unreliable sources such as blogs, YouTube videos and IMDb. The only source that counts as reliable at all is a Q&A interview in which he's talking about himself in the first person on an individual television station's local newscast, which is not enough to get him over GNG all by itself if all of the rest of the sourcing is junk.
Simply having had acting roles is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt a person from having to have proper GNG-worthy coverage. Bearcat (talk) 14:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 14:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to If Loving You Is Wrong: Appears to fail both GNG and NACTOR. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 22:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His role in If Loving You Is Wrong is his only significant role. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 04:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (No comment on redirect - he's been in various films and shows.) I only find one reasonable source: the LA Sentinal listed here. The rest are interviews or otherwise non-independent. Lamona (talk) 02:43, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The U P Files

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

Appears to fail WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 02:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Reviews here, here and here. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 06:12, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Indeed, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:13, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Uttar Pradesh. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bret Kamwi

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

Article doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR and WP:ACTOR. At most impact, for directing a quite significantly covered play, I won't have at prejudice with redirecting to List of Namibian writers. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, ~~Lists of people~~, and Africa. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:48, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey Spencer Stephens

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

Actor primarily known for one part in one movie. Accordingly, fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. There are plenty of sources discussing the one movie and one part, but none for other significant acting parts. Tagged for notability since 2018. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 14:18, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and England. C F A 💬 14:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: He was nominated for a Golden Globe, which is usually enough to be considered notable. C F A 💬 14:58, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The_Omen#Cast: that is what he's notable for and it's sourced. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The articles on his arrest clearly show there has been continued coverage of this person.★Trekker (talk) 15:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher McDonald (booking agent)

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

Fails WP:BASIC. All significant coverage is in promotional blogs. Mostly trivial mentions. A Google search returns nothing except his LinkedIn and for-hire pages.

The article claims he won an Emmy "as a Talent producer and Talent Booker" at the 2024 Emmys. He did not. The citation (p. 31) attached is for the actor Christopher McDonald's win in 2022, a completely different person. In reality, he was a "talent producer", one of many minor credits, for an Emmy-awarded show.

It may be a case of WP:TOOSOON because apparently he has been cast for Superman (2025), although lots of sites claim that it was the other Christopher McDonald so I can't verify that. C F A 💬 13:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, and Washington, D.C.. C F A 💬 13:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nommed; no evidence of notability, per WP:GNG or WP:CREATIVE (although I'm not even sure the latter applies here). This was accepted at AfC expressly to give the community a chance to offer its views, so this AfD doesn't contradict that acceptance, quite the opposite. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: No significance should be attached to my acceptance at AFC. My acceptance rationale is stated on the article's talk page. I intend to maintain a steadfastly neutral stance in this discussion. I do not anticipate that the acceptance will astonish anyone who has read the article talk page comment. You may draw the conclusion that I am surprised that this nomination has taken so long. I will be interested to see the outcome 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This AFC Helpdesk discussion is relevant background reading, though can have no bearing on this discussion per se since the article must be judged on its current state and merits. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: To clarify the Superman bit, it is indeed this Christopher McDonald who has been cast in the film (as evident by his social media posts and initial trade reports correcting their false info pointing to the other McDonald), although since he is a newcomer actor, he does not appear notable for his other work as a talent agent and a TV producer in his own right just yet. I believe this article could merit some worth after the Superman film has released and his role is more known, so I think sending this to the draftspace in case other editors wish to flesh it out more there could be beneficial. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously it's your prerogative to !vote as you see fit, but just to say that this spent a month in drafts, and was declined no fewer than six times at AfC. It was then accepted largely to let the wider community decide its fate, so sending it back to drafts seems like a retrograde step to me. Also, that Superman film is still a year out, and there's no guarantee that it will establish notability for this actor. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:20, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My !vote is in accordance with WP:PRESERVE. I do not believe this is where the nuclear option is required as the whole purpose of the draftspace is for developing article with the potential for mainspace inclusion. There is no harm in letting it move to draftspace and for further work to be done there. Trailblazer101 (talk) 20:20, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughts. here is the logic I followed-
This guideline applies to authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals. Such a person is notable if:
1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors; or
2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique; or
3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series); or -
4. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

I thought that based on category 3- applies to him as the producer of 5 season of the major TV Show Kelly Clarkson. There is no difference between what type of producer this category applies to. The show Kelly Clarkson - is in fact "such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". And it is not a "single episode", but 5 seasons. Again, his work as producer is recognized by Emmy nomination and Emmy award with the Kelly Clarkson.

I'd like to hear if you disagree. But there is a category for producers.

This is the main criteria I used, and we discussed with the editors.

J2009j (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPRODUCER (The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work.) does not apply here. He did not create The Kelly Clarkson Show and he did not co-create The Kelly Clarkson show, and even if somehow being a "Talent Producer and Talent Booker" is considered "creating" the work, his role was certainly not "major" as required by the guideline. Also note that: People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included (i.e. if they meet the guideline, they likely have received enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to write an article; in this case, he has not). C F A 💬 15:38, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J2009j: the way this is indented, it looks like a reply to my comment, but I presume it isn't? Perhaps you could outdent it appropriately, probably to the main level. And please prefix it with an appropriate label per WP:DISCUSSAFD, so that when it comes to closing this discussion it is clear what your intention was. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't. I just do not seem to see a way to leave a separate comment here. J2009j (talk) 16:01, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. C F A 💬 16:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong here. I understand your reasoning. As someone from the related field, I can confirm he indeed co-created. He is the part of the founding team of the show, along with other people nominated for Emmy with the show. For this reason i specifically added a source with all over 150 or so episodes of Kelly Clarkson show with credits. Do you know what is the role of the " talent producer/booker" for the talk show? To bring all the guests who are coming to the shows, for every episode. It does not qualify to "played a major role"?

He was invited by Kelly Clarkson to do the show with her team. That is discussed in many of the podcasts. I believe WP:NPRODUCER was created for producers, those who are working on protects behind the public eye.

The fact that the person worked on all 5 seasons, and did not bothered to even go talk about it somewhere, so it was hard for me looking for sources also speaks about it. This is how the majority of producers are. There was a 2 hours long discussion about him on youtube. It was the first thing I saw a few years ago about this individual. It was so interesting. I was surprised there is no wikipedia page. Do not remember how it was called, but there is similar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5TrrSks77E J2009j (talk) 16:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sure WP:NPRODUCER does not apply here. There is no coverage on how his role was "major" or how he "co-created" the show. You are just speculating. Regardless, there is not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to write an article, as evidenced by the multiple misleading statements and incorrect citations. C F A 💬 16:22, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

please, see my answer above :For this reason i specifically added a source with all over 150 or so episodes of Kelly Clarkson show with credits. Do you know what is the role of the " talent producer/booker" for the talk show? To bring all the guests who are coming to the shows, for every episode. It does not qualify to "played a major role"? This does not sound like a major role to your personal opinion? I believe it is not objective then.

What are the misleading sources you mean? I added the correct file from the Emmy website with the name of the people from the show. I believe that is what we discussed, and you pointed out to me if was some old file. J2009j (talk) 16:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose any action except deletion or retention. DoubleGrazing makes precisely the correct point. I accepted it so that the community could and would make a clear decision about it. Returning it to draft is a pointless exercise after multiple reviews declining it. Let the community decide clearly, please. Trailblazer101 I invite you to come down on one side of the fence or the other. He either passes WP:BIO or he does not. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:39, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have already made my !vote and I see no harm in moving to the draftspace to allow editors a chance to work on it some more. If this figure does become notable, then there would be content history available to go off of. If the draft is not worked on for a period of six months, it would be deleted anyway. I see this as a fitting compromise solution and nothing serious enough to vote for a full deletion. Trailblazer101 (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't see why this was accepted at AfC only to be decided on here, it either meets notability or it doesn't. This seems silly. Oaktree b (talk) 18:37, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It should not have been accepted for AfC because it does not pass notability and still has major issues with the citations. Draftspace is where this type of content should be worked on if desirable, not in the mainspace. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:41, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't "silly". AfC is not, nor should it be, the ultimate arbiter of what gets published; the community is. AfC does not aim for notability beyond reasonable doubt, it aims for better than 50% likelihood, with some inevitable error margin. And given that AfC is in most cases voluntary, there is no point in preventing publication when an author (with no COI or restrictions) is insistent. The rationale for accepting this was perfectly sound, even if the article subsequently ends up here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 18:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: These sources are brief mentions or a list of credits from a tv show... I don't see notability. My search brings up nothing extra we could use either. Oaktree b (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are no sources to be found, beyond quick mentions of his name in relation to various projects. Oaktree b (talk) 18:40, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I replied here regarding point #3 for producers. It does not require mega coverage. The requirement is to create or play significant role in a project. - For this reason i specifically added a source with all over 150 or so episodes of Kelly Clarkson show with credits. Do you know what is the role of the " talent producer/booker" for the talk show? To bring all the guests who are coming to the shows, for every episode. It does not qualify to "played a major role"? This does not sound like a major role to your personal opinion? I believe it is not objective then.

Do you know that none of the producer of the major American late shows have page on wikipedia because they do not care about publicity? Shows like Steven Colbert and others upon my discovery and motivation to cover this category of people. J2009j (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@J2009j: please don't WP:BLUDGEON the discussion. You can make your point, once, but don't need to make it in response to every !vote. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Is there a way to somehow highlight this point at the begging so people can read it? I believe it is an important point. I have bios of at least 3 producers from main American talk shows never even covered by Wikipedia. This category 3# refers to specifically this type of people. I believe it was made with this purpose. If some editors do not know the roles at the talk shows- it is important to know how there are producers for the context and talent building the show, which are major roles, in addition to the host. Host like Kelly Clarkson or Steven Colbert are the only "big" public people there. For example, you on Wikipedia, keep a category for cinematographers who made a significant piece of art, or painters. J2009j (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A talent producer and booking agent are different from the executive producer or television producer roles, which are nore notable and important than arranging guests to appear on a talk show. And only highlighting 150 episodes on a single show does not mean the individual is notable for that work alone.Most talent agents do not receive a ton of coverage unless they are closer to the top, such as Bryan Lourd, Ari Emanuel, and Phil Gersh, to name a few. While his works and clients may be notable, there has not been sufficient evidence to prove McDonald himself is notable beyond his works alone. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if McDonald met WP:NPRODUCER, that is just guidance (People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards.). It is not the same as "presumed" or "inherited" notability. There still needs to be enough coverage to write and accurately source the article, which there clearly isn't. C F A 💬 19:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He may be an extremely competent employee who plays a valuable internal role in making shows run smoothly, but the argument for notability is an unbelievable stretch here. Even assuming that he falls under one of the the genre-specific notability categories in which notability is likely -- and I don't subscribe to that -- the actual significant coverage of this producer is razor-thin. Draftifying it at this point would also just postpone the inevitable and soak up more editor time. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 04:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to disagree. I see that there is this additional criterion. He, as the talent producer of 'The Kelly Clarkson Show,' was nominated for an Emmy and received an Emmy. His name is listed on the website for the award and nomination. It does not matter whether you like it or not, but the fact is that he has it. The names of all employees of the show are not submitted for an Emmy, but only those who play a significant role.
Any biography
- WP:ANYBIO
1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times; or
2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field; or
3. The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography).
J2009j (talk) 17:10, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about whether I like or not. He's not an Emmy award nominee. He's someone who worked on the show that was nominated for an Emmy, not the awardee. This has been told to you repeatedly, in multiple places, and you haven't provided a single reliable source that suggests otherwise. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:27, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And the fact that the reliable source you provide is your simple assertion that we should trust you because you're in the industry, makes it clear that your lack of providing an actually reliable source and my inability to alternatively find a reliable source saying such, is not a coincidence. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 06:30, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per CoffeeCrumbs reasoning. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is a clear absence of substantial coverage of Christopher McDonald, and he does not meet the notability criteria for producers. Ynsfial (talk) 01:24, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David Merriman

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

Repeatedly moved from draft by conflicted user, this clearly fails WP:NFILMMAKER and WP:NMUSICIAN. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Bands and musicians. Theroadislong (talk) 17:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alabama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation corrected in regards to record deal not being secured -evidence of such clearly provided in articles . Personal information removed about family, as is appropriate. Denseem (talk) 08:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No point of view of skew was taken on this articl, simply correcting inaccuracy and removing personal information Denseem (talk) 08:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denseem, you don't need to make 5 nearly identical comments saying the same thing. It can discourage participation from other editors and the best way to come to a consensus to have sufficient editor participation in deletion discussions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the duplicate comments, leaving only one copy behind. Left guide (talk) 11:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I see 1.5 good sources about him - the AL source is substantial; the first Irish Times is brief but is about him. In the rest he's listed as a collaborator with not much about him, or they are interviews. I didn't find anything else about him. NOM seems to be correct that there are COI issues and there appear to have been possible WP:SOCK issues as well. Good to keep an eye on. Lamona (talk) 16:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
two Variety articles and Screen magazine are substantial sources in the film business. 77.75.96.206 (talk) 14:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that those articles are not about him; he is only name-checked there. So those don't count toward notability, even though they can source some information in the article. Lamona (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 18:26, 10 August 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 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. RL0919 (talk) 18:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chalet Lizette Brannan

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

Article about a non-notable actress and philanthropist. Does not meet WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. Has only played minor roles in movies. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and United States of America. Jamiebuba (talk) 12:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Minor acting roles; some interviews and stories about her beating cancer found in Gnews, but not really helping notability (most are about a "local person that beat cancer and helps others"). Her philanthropy is fine, but not that much different than any one else really. Oaktree b (talk) 23:46, 3 August 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.

Pradeep Kumar (producer)

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:NPERSON. M S Hassan (talk | contributions) 06:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Bihar, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is a lot of news story talking about the guy on Google News Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, we don't go by Google hits but by reliable secondary sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Darby Lloyd Rains

AfDs for this article:

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

16 years ago when this was first nominated it was allowed on a technical sng pass and someone noted it needed sourcing. Well 16 years later it's entirely bereft of a reliable source and pornbio has been consigned to the ranks of deprecated guidelines. Fails gng and ent. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Sexuality and gender, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets WP:NACTOR with at least three significant roles in notable films. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:14, 31 July 2024 (UTC) (Added a few sources, more sources exist).[reply]
Can you list the films and roles please

And the sources added? Ta Spartaz ^Humbug! 00:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the page, check page history and the link "edits since nomination" on this page. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. M S Hassan (talk | contributions) 09:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Except the nom's concerns have been addressed. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:09, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He obviously disagrees with your assertion. You stated she had 3 significant roles in notable films. What were they? The Wp:onus is on you to show what they are here. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:37, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
’Obviously’? So the page still has no source? OK. I will assume good faith then. As for the rest of your comment, unless you are joking (it’s rather funny), I will assume good faith too: again, just read the page. You need to click on the title of the article on top of this page. I’m not going to copy paste the whole page here. And, by the way, what did you find during your BEFORE? Also, during the 1st AfD, the page was not ’allowed on technical sng pass’ but with a reference to (ANY)BIO (no technical mention of PORNBIO) and with a mention of ’definitely some claims to notability’. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment: Lloyd Rains also clearly meets the requirements for the notability of actors for another reason: her prolific and noted contributions to the field; and probably passes the threshold for general notability requirements given the amount of ’’multiple independent sources" mentioning her importance in the said field, her roles and performances..-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as we need to hear from more editors. An aside though: Are we really going to talk about "noted contributions to the field" for porn as if it were the sciences, the arts or diplomacy?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to relist aside: Yes, we certainly are. Especially in the Golden Age of Porn and with directors and artists that had such a strong and honest conviction they were playing an important part in the underground culture of their time and in the history of film. Various films with Lloyd Rains are genre films (horror, thriller, etc) that go far beyond what could be described as "porn" in a derogative way. And various sources, some used as references in the article (you will note that I used no sources from inside the "adult industry" and they include extremely notable and reliable film magazines and scholarship) about her films and performance do indeed mention that point, some in awe at the quality of the productions and at Lloyd Rains's abilities as an actress (one review finds her acting "insufferable", though; and that's not my opinion, which does not count and has nothing to do with my !vote and reply). Now, one might disagree and consider the result has no value, is immoral, tasteless, shocking, silly and trash, and not like it. But it's definitely a "field" in my opinion and her contributions to it were clearly prolific, and noted. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aside: I was not even thinking about "porn" when I wrote my additional comment (but about film in general). But, yes, I do think "pornography" is a field. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll close this discussion according to policy and consensus despite my own view of this "profession". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:09, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never doubted you would. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:11, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You know that none of what you said relates to any policy and your assertion of special treatment of porn is belied by the depreciation of pornbio Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:22, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are you even talking about? I don’t understand it but I do feel the tone and implication of your comment are rather not nice. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Tomassian

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

nonnotable voice actor - Altenmann >talk 03:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and France. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm trying to evaluate WP:ENT, but Alexis Tomassian § Filmography is pretty misleading; for instance, Tomassian did not voice Zuko in A:TLA, but rather in its French dub. The best I can find so far is voicing the main characters of Martin Mystery and The Podcats, and the latter's notability is questionable. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He also voiced Samson in Calamity, a Childhood of Martha Jane Cannary; he's listed as the third star, and a review describes Samson as the plot's initial catalyst. That looks like a significant role to me. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a significant coverage of Tomassian. In fact, not a mum about him. Notability not inherited - Altenmann >talk 18:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll paraphrase the part of WP:ENT that applies here: An actor or voice actor may be considered notable if they have had significant roles in multiple notable films or television shows. That's from a subject-specific notability guideline. "Significant coverage" has nothing to do with that – it's only in WP:GNG. I also don't see your point with WP:INHERIT – that section names SNGs as a case where notability can be inherited. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see, thanks for clarification. Still, I fail to see "initial catalyst" is "significant role": Samson is covered in a single sentence. If a role is significant, surely it deserves more than that. About INHERIT, thanks again, I stand corrected. - Altenmann >talk 22:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The review's pretty sparse on plot in general, and Samson's one sentence is more than any other (non-main) character gets. Calamity, a Childhood of Martha Jane Cannary § Plot goes into more detail, and he's mentioned in 9 sentences there (mostly as "the soldier", but that's unambiguous). jlwoodwa (talk) 23:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be obnoxious, but one needs an independent source that describes character's role as "significant" or similar, otherwise it is Wikipedian's opinion/original research. In the case of Calamity, I inclined to believe, because imdb say "starring Salomé Boulven Alexandra Lamy Alexis Tomassian", implying these are major roles, but unfortunately imdb is not a valid ref for wikipedia. OK. I'm done being obnoxious here. :-) - Altenmann >talk 23:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that notability needs to be based on reliable sources, but we're never going to get a reliable source to directly support a claim that "this subject is wikinotable". That's probably why WP:NOR's lead says it doesn't apply to deletion discussions. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Red herring. Strawman. Muddy waters. Don't give it to me. We need a source which supports our requirement for notability. In this case we need sources which imply that the actor had "significant roles in multiple notable films or television shows". And this must acceptable for the article, not for AfD bickering. - Altenmann >talk 07:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? It's not a red herring. WP:NOR literally states that This policy does not apply to talk pages and other pages which evaluate article content and sources, such as deletion discussions or policy noticeboards. Can you explain why you think we need those particular sources, given that WP:NOR does not apply? jlwoodwa (talk) 09:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. You cannot base article content on non-reliable sources. Just the same, you cannot judge subject notability basing on self-published sources. Are you seriously telling me that if actor's mom says that her boy is the greatest actor, then we write a Wikipedia article about him? AfD discussions routinely judge sources, and WP:NOR has nothing to do with this. - Altenmann >talk 16:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not telling you that. I don't know why you'd think I'm telling you that. As I said before, I agree that notability needs to be based on reliable sources. I'm only objecting to your statement that one needs an independent source that describes character's role as "significant" or similar, otherwise it is Wikipedian's opinion/original research. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not objecting that a certain degree of "original research" is necessary in AfD discussions: of course, judging sources is kinda "original research", but this kind of Wikipedian's opinion about sources is everywhere in Wikipedia, and it is not really original research. I see we are in the same page here, so never mind. - Altenmann >talk 20:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Donaldd23's improvements, Zombillenium now looks notable, and a review describes Steven (Tomassian's character) for three sentences. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, interesting discussion but we need some firm opinions on what should happen with this article and so far, I don't see any other than the nominator's. As for sources, I've seen dozens of actors' bios at AFD and "significant role" is typically judged not by a reliable source that says, exactly, that an actor's role was significant but by whether their character is listed as a main character in the film information. But there have been successful arguments that some supporting roles are also significant so there is an element of subjectivity involved.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:37, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liz summarized the discussion correctly: we need sources that the actor had significant role, i.e., they were either among main characters (no further sources needed) or among supporting roles which were somehow noted by critics (e.g. award for "best supporting role" (but in the latter case it is for notability anyway), or other mentions, eg I saw statements that this or that secondary role unexpectedly rose to prominence in a film due to actor's extraordinary acting). - Altenmann >talk 03:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- <sigh> I have to go against my own nom, since nobody else bothers: Tomassian voiced Kaworu Nagisa (in French dubbing), definitely among main chars. - Altenmann >talk 03:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robin Davey

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

None of the sources presently used establish notability (either due to not saying much about Davey, or not being RS, or not being independent), and I wasn't able to find significant coverage of Robin Davey in reliable sources, only mentions. There also seems to be COI editing in the history of the article, such as edits from User:Growvision01. toweli (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Photography, United Kingdom, and England. toweli (talk) 13:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Netherzone (talk) 19:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Canary Effect. This film seems to be his greatest accomplishment, but I do not find sufficient sources about him to support an article. I agree with NOM that the sources in the article are very weak, and I didn't find anything better. Note that there are other Robin Davey's who show up in a search, mainly one who is an animator based in Berlin. I'm pretty sure that is a different person but I couldn't prove it. Lamona (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:30, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carla Guevara Laforteza

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

Very highly advertorialized ("known for being one of the most fearless and versatile Premiere Leading Ladies", "She enjoys watching movies, baking, and absolutely enjoys Cake, Fried Chicken and Pizza", etc.) WP:BLP of an actress and musician not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for actresses or musicians. There are statements here that would be valid notability claims if they were referenced properly, but nothing so "inherently" notable as to exempt her from having to cite proper sources just because of what the article asserts -- but this was "sourced" almost entirely to IMDB pages, Wikidata items and other Wikipedia articles, none of which are acceptable or notability-supporting sources, and after stripping those out all that's left is three short blurbs that aren't substantive enough to get her over WP:GNG all by themselves if they're the best she can do for proper third party coverage.
I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much more knowledge about Philippine musical theatre than I've got can rewrite it neutrally and source it properly, but it can't be kept in this state of writing tone and sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 13:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Philippines. Bearcat (talk) 13:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for your comment, we are now currently working with the revisions of the article, the person in this article is also involve now in the revision. Thank you. Jhenie1326 (talk) 17:46, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with our conflict of interest rules, because "the person in this article is also involve now in the revision" is the worst thing you could possibly have said here. Bearcat (talk) 18:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks just for the verification of the information, however the info is now being updated as per the article published by the news or legal website, please be patient.. thank you for your help. Jhenie1326 (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Draftify. I went through the references, which were inconsistent in formating, and reformatted many of them. I also checked to see if the refs support the information. They do not support the Education and Personal Life section. I also do not see indepth sources; most are brief "fluffy" bits. As it looks like this article is recent and is still being worked on, draftify may be the best solution. Lamona (talk) 03:46, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fakt Marathi Cine Sanman for Best Director

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

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. This is an award given by a television network. There is no coverage much less GNG coverage of the topic of the article which is the award. North8000 (talk) 13:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:34, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:35, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Fakt Marathi Cine Sanman: Not really opposed to Keep as WP:SPLITLIST. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. No GNG or SIGCOV. Redirect won't really of any help and there is no coverage justifying the article's existence. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

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