Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Skynxnex (talk | contribs) at 20:35, 19 December 2024 (Listing Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/David_Ayer's_unrealized_projects (assisted)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• WP:DSACTOR

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

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk)Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

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 {{Misplaced Pages: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.

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 {{Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers/archive
• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers/archive 2
• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers/archive 3

Scan for actor AfDs

Scan for filmmaker AfDs

Actors and filmmakers

David Ayer's unrealized projects

David Ayer's unrealized projects (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)

With a recent expansion of what is considered "unrealized", it's really gotten to a point I have realized these articles largely stand to be rather WP:TRIVIA and WP:FANCRUFT. As higlighted by @Erik: at Luca Guadagnino's unrealized projects, "if a so-called "unrealized project" is not talked about in retrospect, it has little value", and as per WP:IINFO, ""To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." Just a contemporary news article about a filmmaker being attached to so-and-so, with no later retrospective commentary, does not strike me as discriminate encyclopedic content to have". I no longer see these pages being of note, and is just a trivial list of several projects, whether they were notable or not, that never came to be, their development or attempted production not being of vital note. Rusted AutoParts 20:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Why proceed with a single AFD case now, as opposed to having an RFC to determine if such articles are appropriate, and with what criteria? Erik (talk | contrib) 20:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  Given the dialogue with Zander on Guadagnino's, it's become clear these pages are purely just seen as trivia. Some very few unrealized projects are indeed are of interest, but when looking at the page, and it's largely "X announced plans to make X, but never did", it just doesn't scream as being a vital article to have. Terry Zwigoff's unrealized projects is particularly exemplary of this. Rusted AutoParts 20:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Lists, and United States of America. Skynxnex (talk) 20:35, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Perfectly standard. Sources. WP:SPLITLIST applies. -Mushy Yank. 01:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  A page having sources doesn’t make the topic of value. It’s a list of films that never happened, or didn’t happen with the person, which makes their involvement with it both not that important to the person, or the project. Why does a list of that need to be on Misplaced Pages as its own page? Where does this end then? Does this open the door towards “Tom Cruise’s untaken roles”? Rusted AutoParts 01:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  What opens the door towards "Tom Cruise's untaken roles" is reliable outlets taking "Tom Cruise's untaken roles" up as an in-depth subject. I.e. sources, and sources only - but the sources have to handle the untaken roles as an entity. Standalone articles about individual scrapped projects can't be synthesized to a Misplaced Pages article per WP:SYNTH. An article about a director's turned-down or walked-over direction opportunities survived AFD not too long ago. Geschichte (talk) 10:41, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  And in my opinion it probably shouldn’t have. Clearly, what constitutes “unrealized” currently is too broad and thus it has entitled editors to include all these different projects that really don’t fall under “unrealized”. A lot of these articles have sections where it’s just like a sentence or two, and it’s about the director being “offered”, or being “considered” to direct something they never did. Or projects that were announced once and never discussed at all again, or even projects they’re verifiably still attached to and working on. That to me just makes these lists become flashy tidbit factoids that if the project was actually seen through with someone else it can just easily be noted in the film’s article, or the directors article. A whole article dedicated to mostly unproduced films with no notable production history is superfluous. Rusted AutoParts 14:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Burn it to ashes, and then burn the ashes, per WP:LISTCRIT (what constitutes "unrealized" is horribly vague), WP:NOTGOSSIP (so-and-so was rumored to be working on such-and-such), and the really excellent nomination statement. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Merge to David Ayer – it makes more sense to discuss these projects in the context of his larger career (or to omit certain projects if their coverage is too trivial, but that can happen after a merge). Regardless of notability, at times it is better to cover a notable topic as part of a larger page about a broader topic (WP:PAGEDECIDE). RunningTiger123 (talk) 03:56, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Few editors are willing to take responsibility of it. No issue in keeping the article for some more time unless there are no significant improvements. Raymond3023 (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that "Perfectly standard" or "No issue in keeping the article" are not guideline-based arguments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 08:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Maybe not (although common sense should incite us to believe that a perfectly standard page is very likely an acceptable page as standalone list/article.) But SPLITLIST is a guideline, and a solid reason for keeping list-formatted pages. -Mushy Yank. 13:19, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

• merge back to David Ayer and maybe thin this out. Right now this comes across as the films he didn't make are the most important part of his work. Mangoe (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:29, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Luca Guadagnino's unrealized projects

There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article, in a manner that does not comply with Misplaced Pages's policies. Editors are encouraged to use neutral mechanisms for requesting outside input (e.g. a "request for comment", a third opinion or other noticeboard post, or neutral criteria: "pinging all editors who have edited this page in the last 48 hours"). If someone has asked you to provide your opinion here, examine the arguments, not the editors who have made them. Reminder: disputes are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote.

Luca Guadagnino's unrealized projects (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)

With a recent expansion of what is considered "unrealized", it's really gotten to a point I have realized these articles largely stand to be rather WP:TRIVIA and WP:FANCRUFT. As higlighted by @Erik:, "if a so-called "unrealized project" is not talked about in retrospect, it has little value", and as per WP:IINFO, ""To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." Just a contemporary news article about a filmmaker being attached to so-and-so, with no later retrospective commentary, does not strike me as discriminate encyclopedic content to have". Having created this particular article myself, I no longer see this page being of note, and is just a trivial list of several projects, whether they were notable or not, that never came to be, their development or attempted production not being of vital note. Rusted AutoParts 20:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film, Lists, and Italy. Skynxnex (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: A perfectly standard page, with sources. WP:SPLITLIST applies. -Mushy Yank. 01:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Keep: A good article, well formatted and written out and perfectly and completely worthy of it's own existence, with enough projects to constitute having an article of it's own to compile them all. Therefore, it is indeed a "page of note" and unworthy of deletion. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 02:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Burn it to ashes, and then burn the ashes, per WP:LISTCRIT (what constitutes "unrealized" is horribly vague), WP:NOTGOSSIP (so-and-so was rumored to be working on such-and-such), and the really excellent nomination statement. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:59, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Merge to Luca Guadagnino – similar to my !vote at the AfD for David Ayer's unrealized projects, these types of projects can be covered better within the context of the filmmaker's entire career (see WP:PAGEDECIDE). Some of these projects are fairly trivial and could be cut, but that can be resolved through normal editing and discussion processes. RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  The number of projects is too vast to merge. And too many of them are "of note" to warrant "cutting" as you suggested. As I've said before, this belief of "irrelevance" of these articles is just incorrect. I see no difference than if it were a career biography. In a career bio, bits and pieces of information are taken from various sources to sum up a person's career, and for an Unrealized Projects page, various pieces of information about films/projects that were unproduced are taken and compiled together. A career bio, should include information from that person's career, and ideally, if they're a filmmaker, have a note or background on every film they made. This is true of most articles. Every film is listed out and explained in order. So therefore, for a page which Unrealized Projects is the main subject, everything should be included that is KNOWN. Just as with a career biography ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 16:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  The page size of Luca Guadagnino is about 2500 words; this page is about 1500 words, which could easily be fit into that article (the general threshold to consider a WP:SIZESPLIT is somewhere around 6000 to 8000 words). And many of these sections could be trimmed; we don't need beat-by-beat details of the production history (actor announcements, writer announcements, etc.). For instance, there is as much coverage of Rio here as there is about Bones and All in the main biography, even though the former was just an announcement and the latter was a project he saw all of the way through. Hence why I feel this information could be incorporated into the main article about his career. RunningTiger123 (talk) 20:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  Again, I feel there are so many that they warrant having their own page. Many and several of these projects have also been mentioned in MANY outside sources "as a group or set" and therefore satisfies WP:LISTN. Case in point. I'm just a broken record here at this point. No special reason for this article to be deleted. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Keep: The article is written appropriately and the current definition of "unrealized" is quite vague. Deleting this article would also give the precedence for deleting dozens of other articles that have the same features, such as Martin Scorsese's Nils2088 (talk) 17:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Nil2088 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)
• Keep per WP:LISTN. This list has been discussed “as a group or a set” at ThePlaylist.net and The Film Experience. The Film Creator (talk) 18:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC) — Note: An editor has expressed a concern that The Film Creator (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. (diff)

  I don't think those websites are referring to this page, they're referencing the projects independently. Misplaced Pages is not mentioned in either source. Rusted AutoParts 18:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  The projects have been discussed as a group or set and published in articles, and are therefore worthy of having their own Misplaced Pages page. That was the entire point. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 18:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  They literally said "This list"..... Even then, just talking about a failed project doesn't make the histroy of that project that important, unless the project is a long gestating one. Such as the production history for The Flash, or the development on the Akira live action remake. Rusted AutoParts 19:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  As in, the actual projects featured on "this list". ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 19:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  See the expansion of my comment. Rusted AutoParts 19:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  Well, that's an opinion. More information could come into light in the future about each project. Some projects have loads of information, others do not. Just as career information in a career bio has an abundance of information, and others do not. This does not mean the others should not be included. Case in point. Since the projects are listed "as a group or set" in many, many, many other articles, the list passes WP:LISTN. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 19:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  The vast majority of Guadagnino's unrealized projects are tiny blurbs. The only ones that stand out as noteworthy are Find Me, maybe Scarface and Brideshead Revisited. Buddenbrooks, Lord of the Flies, Leading Men, Sgt. Rock and American Psycho are all projects he is still noted as working on, thus making them unapplicable to the page. Why is it pertinent to know that he was once attached to a film called Burial Rites in 2017, but nothing ever came of it? Why Swan Lake? Being a list doesn't inherently make it notable or necessary. We used to have a list of all the films granted permission to film during the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, it was eventually removed because it wasn't noteworthy. Rusted AutoParts 19:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

  I was not aware of the last example you mentioned. I would agree with that removal, because the films were granted permission to be 'realized'. However I would pose the question if there is a section of all the projects that were officially cancelled and never picked back up again as result of the 2023 strike? That would be a section to warrant keeping/having. Again, I'm not sure how else to explain it, just like a filmmaker's career bio lists out the background of every film they worked on (no matter how little the film, compared to how big the film, or how little information there is on this subject, as opposed to the amount of information on the other), they should still all be included because it is apart of the director's career. The same is true of unmade films, if it was an idea they had and was mentioned in an article-list it, official offers-list it, a project they worked on for five years-list it, a one-off article mentioning a project they were attached to-list it, etc. ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 20:58, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

It's important to note that @ZanderAlbatraz1145: is currently canvassing for votes. See here. Rusted AutoParts 19:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Here as well. Rusted AutoParts 19:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

And again. 2 of the 3 messaged have voted inline with Zander. Rusted AutoParts 19:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reverted my close and relisting per requests on my Talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 01:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Since canvassing occurred here, I was hoping to see additional participation in this AFD since its closure was reverted but that hasn't happened yet. I'll try an additional relisting but any admin closer is welcome to close this discussion if they believe they see a consensus that is not unduly influenced by the canvassing. I realize that this AFD has been open for several weeks now but I think an appropriate closure is more important than a speedy one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 01:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

• Merge to Luca Guadagnino, per RunningTiger123. All of the content here that can be merged into Luca Guadagnino after trimming and condensing sections. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
• Strong Keep as the article passes WP:LISTN since these projects have been published in outside sources in which they are described "as a group or a set" such as ThePlaylist.net and The Film Experience. Additionally, I have also found this one and this one in which Guadagnino himself discusses a couple of his 'dream projects'/past projects, as well as this one which discusses them as prospective, as in 'recent', unproduced or not. He also discussed some of his past, present and possible future dream projects in this 2018 NY profile. It has also, while not 'official', has been a frequent topic of discussion in other forums such as this Reddit post in which they are broken down. Another reason why this topic is worthy of having it's own page, as it's being discussed amongst other groups separate from Misplaced Pages. This article also breaks a couple of them down, Separate Rooms and Scarface, and on and on... In this IndieWire article, Guadagnino is "especially" mentioned as being a notable director "whole filmographies of projects they started developing before eventually abandoning." ZanderAlbatraz1145 (talk) 02:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

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. asilvering (talk) 05:22, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Aleksandra Fontaine

Aleksandra Fontaine (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)

Out of 11 references provided, YouTube, IMDb (2), Personal website(2) (fontainemedia, as mentioned in the article) (2). Except for ref 10, none of the rest 4 refs mention the subject. Subject fails the basic criteria (WP:BASIC) for all 8 mentioned professional including WP:NACTOR and WP:ENTERTAINER. ANU 04:23, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Bands and musicians, Women, Journalism, Dance, Theatre, France, and Poland. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep and improve (with cuts). There is https://www.lindependant.fr/2024/08/21/des-artistes-en-villegiature-chez-aleksandra-12152552.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2023/11/19/aleksandra-kedzierska-a-la-mediatheque-11590278.php https://dziennikpolski24.pl/z-paryskiego-lido-do-variete-w-krakowie/ar/3939301, https://www.leparisien.fr/culture-loisirs/dans-les-pyrenees-orientales-lebouriffante-galerie-dart-dune-ancienne-danseuse-du-lido-02-08-2021-QFFJSIB55RFHRDFND7JBA6WETY.php https://www.lindependant.fr/2022/12/23/saint-laurent-de-cerdans-aleksandra-kedzierska-signe-son-3e-roman-tombe-lombre-10886548.php https://lepetitjournal.com/varsovie/communaute/aleksandra-fontaine-lido-doublure-margaret-qualley-substance-399242 and https://kultura.onet.pl/wywiady-i-artykuly/aleksandra-kedzierska-fontaine-ciagle-jestem-glodna-nowych-wrazen/p3xmxx5 for example. She does seem to meet the requirements for notability. -Mushy Yank. 07:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Mushy Yank I hope you're suggesting the article should be returned to draftspace for improvement, as it can not stand in the mainspace the way it is right now. I still think It should be deleted. ANU 08:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  No, I am not, I am clearly suggesting it should be kept.AfDs are for deletion not for cleanup and we are only discussing the notability of the subject not the state of the page. Feel free to improve it if you wish. -Mushy Yank. 12:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  We do not leave any article with such unverified claims or references as this article just because the topic has references on web, we have draftspace for improvement or deletion if the subject doesn't even deserve draftspace opportunity. This subject deserves nothing than to be deleted. ANU 00:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  No. If you want the page to be improved, again, feel free. Feel free to remove everything you find potentially harmful or libellous. I've provided some sources, you can use them. You submitted this to the community. If consensus is to keep it, it will be kept, if it is to drafifty, it will be moved to draft, if it is to delete, it will be deleted, and so on. Your own opinion was clear from the start by the mere fact you nominated it and by your rationale. If you didn't want others to voice opinions that differ from yours, you shouldn't have nominated this article to AfD. I will leave it at that. Thank you very much. -Mushy Yank. 01:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  I'm so sorry if any of my answers offended you in any ways, I'm just trying to discuss what I think is right and everyone is doing so. Angain, all I want for the page is for it to be taken down not improved that's why I requested it's deletion, it has nothing to improve based on reasons I provided, thank you. Again I'm humbly sorry if I offended you in any way, I don't intend to offend any valuable editor in here. ANU 01:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you. No offense taken. But my point is precisely that I think (and apparently I am not the only one) that there is something to improve. I'll do it, then. -Mushy Yank. 01:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep in view of the multiple reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion which together shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  Since you pointed out WP:GNG, can you get back to the article and point any two reliable sources? ANU 00:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  if the sources are presented here, I would tend to think that asking someone to locate them in the article is not very useful. Anyway, I have added them to the page. -Mushy Yank. 02:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per above Mushy Yank's. MPian (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Passes GNG. WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Adequate sources have been provided to show the subject meets GNG. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Important note: This article have more than four reasons to be deleted.

- WP:COI issue, several claims in the article are written by someone with a close alias to the subject, You can't find and source mentioning them (i.e career and biography), that's why such a short article is asked to verify 8 claims to show where such claims came from, even with all sources in the article or additional sources provided by @Mushy Yank, none can prove those claims or is wikipedia a gossip hub now?

- For entertainers, they should have any notable work or achievement, well, the subject is an actress, choreographer and dancer, what are her important achievements of her career (i.e any notable film or show) or maybe accomplishments such as awards and accordance. Does she have any? If she doesn't have any achievement or work mentioned or seen, why is she considered important to keep this article?

- @Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs, youtube links that were used as references in the article. Should we accept terrible articles because we believe subjects might be notable somehow in the web, What's the point of having draftspace and sandboxes?

- The article fails even WP:BASIC, 90% of references in the article are not reliable, any editor can inspect and get that in minutes. i.e self published pdfs, personal blogs, YouTube links, podcast interviews e.t.c.

- Let's be honest here, with all Polish references, isn't the article suitable in Polish wikipedia? Most of EnWiki readers have understanding of Enlang and expect to verify claims from EnEng sources, that's the point of having multi-lang wikis. This wikipedia isn't for her maybe when she becomes global sensation. Inshort, she isn't notable but a local artist, with first and second references proving she's now heading to perform out there for the first time from local venues. Deletion is so crucial here.ANU 01:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Kindly unbold your !vote. You are the nominator and you are already considered "!voting" delete and !voting twice is not permitted. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 01:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you ANU 01:39, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

- COI is supposed to be addressed through editing, not deletion. Again, WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP.

- No, that's not how notability works. Entertainers can pass either GNG or NENT. They don't have to pass both.

- This is something that should be addressed through editing, not deletion. The article isn't so terrible that TNT is warranted.

- This is a complete misunderstanding of WP:BASIC. Please read it carefully. Again, the terrible sources are an issue that should be addressed through editing, not deletion.

- No, that's not how notability works. Please read through WP:GNG. Sources of any and all languages count for notability as long as they are independent, reliable and provide SIGCOV. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 11:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: please note that the nominator seems to admit that the subject's notability is "proven". If that is helpful, I am inviting the nominator to read WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP.-Mushy Yank. 02:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  No, the nominator did not admit anywhere that the subject's notability is "proven". This user is trying to play the insinuating card. The nominator gave 5 cold facts as to why the subject is never notable which stand unchallenged. ANU 05:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  !!.....Just read what you yourself wrote..."Mushy Yank proved her notability through references from the web and not personal blogs"...... So no, this user is not "trying to play the insinuating card" (:D). I've tried to improve the page, by the way and you're very welcome. At this point, I have no further comments. -Mushy Yank. 07:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 speedy delete‎. Deleted as a CSD G5 Liz 23:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Ahmed Bin Sojib

Ahmed Bin Sojib (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)

Lacks significant coverage that are not puffy PR pieces. Neither the businessperson nor his company appear to be notable. Fancy Refrigerator 01:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Bangladesh. Fancy Refrigerator 01:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Music. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:38, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

His company i will create, he is channel i music award winner, so, i was create his page Susdtr (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

He was accused of funding the 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement killing mission. I think there is a reason to keep this page. If you seniors think it is not relevant then you can delete it Susdtr (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Checked their business article and this article; found sources to be PR, extensively promoting the subject. Fails WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 07:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  I picked them up from the news, I don't know him personally Susdtr (talk) 08:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  A few days ago acted in Imran Mahmudul's song, so I thought it was necessary to make this page, so I did i Susdtr (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Mwijaku

Mwijaku (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)

After observing the article being too promotional (still is), I moved the it back to draft space hoping for improvement that would follow a regular review at AFC but the original editor moved it back direct to the mainspace also nowhere in the references show subject's (important claims) like date of birth or number of children they have, where did the editor get them? That's WP: PROMOTIONAL, WP:COIEDIT and tries to use wikipedia as WP:SOAPBOX.

No any notable work listed show subject's importance, just a bunch of gossip blogs. Just a reminder, Misplaced Pages isn't a gossip blog/newspaper WP:NOTGOSSIP.

Refs: Only The Citizen is a reliable source, the rest are blogs that cannot be trusted on WP:BLP. ANU 01:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Radio, Television, Internet, and Tanzania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - No indication of notability. --John B123 (talk) 20:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

As the editor of this article, I have made improvements by adding additional information from sources that I believe are credible. Please review it to see if it is satisfactory and help me by correcting any mistakes. 3L3V8D (talk) 20:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 02:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As there is an unbolded Keep here, I don't think that a Soft Deletion is an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 04:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:57, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Carlton Wilborn

Carlton Wilborn (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 indication of WP:SUSTAINED notability here. Amigao (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Dance, Music, Television, Video games, and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - all unreliable sources. I like to read gossip as much as the person, but we have never published original material. Bearian (talk) 05:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - Wilborn's prominence and recognition is solely as Madonna's dancer, and not enough WP:NOTABILITY by himself. —IB 13:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. No valid secondary sourcing to prove WP:GNG.TitCrisse (talk) 03:47, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - The sourcing is mostly unreliable and one can't be notable by association.Ynsfial (talk) 14:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. North America 12:53, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Kamand Amirsoleimani

Kamand Amirsoleimani (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 and WP:BIO, as no significant coverage in reliable, independent sources is available to establish notability. IMDb and MUBI are not reliable sources (WP:USERG). Nxcrypto Message 10:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, Film, and Iran. Nxcrypto Message 10:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: a fairly notable actress, meeting WP:NACTRESS with multiple significant roles in notable productions; the page needs improvement and the corresponding article in Persian can help, for a start. -Mushy Yank. 12:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Mushy Yank Kamand Amirsoleimani may have participated in notable productions, the article heavily relies on local news sites, which are not considered reliable or independent sources for establishing WP:ACTRESS notability. Nxcrypto Message 03:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  No. Your assertion that "local news sites are not considered reliable or independent sources for establishing WP:ACTRESS notability." is simply not true. -Mushy Yank. 20:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -Mushy Yank. 01:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• Weak Keep The subject appears to meet some notability however there is still need for improvement. Tesleemah (talk) 08:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Tesleemah I agree that some aspects of the subject's notability are present, but the article heavily relies on local news sources, which are not sufficient to meet the notability criteria outlined in WP:GNG, WP:ACTOR and WP:BIO. For the article to be kept, it needs substantial sourcing from reliable, independent publications that can verify her notability on an international scale. Without this, I feel it is premature to retain the article. Nxcrypto Message 03:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  If the local news are reliable, I think that's fine. It doesn't have to be on an international scale. Tesleemah (talk) 05:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Passes NACTOR through roles in Angel Street Bride, The Enigma of the Shah, I'm Just Kidding, Foggy Tabriz and In Search of Peace. May also pass GNG. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep: Kamand Amirsoleimani’s page should be retained as it satisfies the notability criteria outlined in WP:NACTOR, which specifies that actors with significant roles in multiple notable productions meet the threshold for inclusion. Amirsoleimani’s roles in acclaimed works such as Angel Street Bride, The Enigma of the Shah, I’m Just Kidding, Foggy Tabriz, and In Search of Peace demonstrate her impact in the entertainment industry. While the article may require improvement, the claim that local news sources are inherently unreliable contradicts WP:RS, which allows for context-specific consideration of reliability. Local sources are valid when covering regional figures who have garnered significant attention within their cultural sphere. Furthermore, the corresponding Persian Misplaced Pages article offers a foundation for bolstering the English version. Articles should not be deleted when they can be improved to meet standards, per WP:PRESERVE. Lastly, the subject’s contribution to a historically and culturally rich film industry like Iran’s merits retention under WP:GEOLAND, which recognizes the importance of regional context in establishing notability. Yarshater (talk) 22:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Beeblebrox 23:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Keely Shaye Smith

Keely Shaye Smith (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)

Notable mainly for being Pierce Brosnan's wife. However, notability is not inherited. All reliable references to her exist because she is Pierce Brosnan's wife.

Fails notability guideline WP:JOURNALIST --LK (talk) 09:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. --LK (talk) 09:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Journalism, Television, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Comment I've found a few non-trivial newspaper articles that aren't just about her link to Brosnan. The second one mentions their relationship but it's more about her and her own career work. 1, 2. GoldenAgeFan1 (talk) 14:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep while the article is not fully referenced there are four sources with WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. Two were noted by GoldenAgeFan1 and I found two others. While all but one mention Pierce Brosnan they are primarily about the subject. All are now in the article but were not before the AfD discussion. There may be more sources but it's difficult to find those that might be primarily about the subject given all the articles about the Brosnans as a couple. Nnev66 (talk) 02:42, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

1. Novakovich, Lilana (August 21, 1989). "Food therapy for GH's Valerie". The Toronto Star – via newspapers.com.
2. Slewinski, Christy (December 29, 1995). "Keely Shaye Smith turns her green thumb to gold". Chicago Tribune. ProQuest 291082310 – via newspapers.com.
3. Fabian, Allison (January 1999). "Keely Shaye Smith putting her passion to work". New Woman. Vol. 29, no. 1. New York: Hearst Magazine Media, Inc. p. 13. ProQuest 206658619.
4. Tschinkel, Arielle (August 5, 2024). "Who Is Pierce Brosnan's Wife? All About Keely Shaye Brosnan". People (magazine).

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:55, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment found another source Close-Up | Keely Shaye Smith in Orange Coast magazine with significant coverage of the subject and no mention of Pierce Brosnan which I added to the article. This source plus the four I noted above with my keep !vote should provide enough sources for WP:GNG. Nnev66 (talk) 17:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 13:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Felix Mendez

Felix Mendez (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 is my first nomination, so correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the subject of this article is not notable. I haven't found any sources that would talk about him in detail. Li1411 (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Li1411 (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Name is too common to find anything about this individual, all kinds of hits on various subjects with this name. The one source used now is a PR item, so a non-RS. Oaktree b (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Fail to meet WP:GNG on WP:NBIO and WP:PRODUCER criteria. Content available online are predominantly from social media and user generated websites. No WP:RS or WP:IS for WP:V. QEnigma (talk) 14:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Music, Television, Advertising, Puerto Rico, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per above. If you find 2 or 3 reliable sources, please ping me. Bearian (talk) 04:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. This is nothing more than a glorified CV, no secondary sources to prove WP:GNG. TitCrisse (talk) 02:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Consensus is clear among established editors and with policy compliant input. Star Mississippi 15:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Jimmy Rex

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Jimmy Rex (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)

Total promo nonsense article, sourced to passing mentions with nothing meaningful in the way of actual coverage - and the only mentions of Rex are again, in passing, if even that. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 19:46, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Dont label an article that I spent my time and effort working on nonsense. Talk to me with respect. Cokeandbread (talk) 20:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Weak delete: I was asked to review this article earlier. I tagged it as relying too heavily on primary sources. It seems like with how long this person has been around and the circles they trade in it would be easy for him to be notable by some metric, but his projects and interviews have no independent coverage and there's little to nothing I could find that discusses him in an impartial way. Reconrabbit 20:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks man. Cokeandbread (talk) 21:59, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Utah. Shellwood (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep: I created the page so let me explain why. I will start like this.

In the early days of Instagram verification, before Instagram gave out verification, they didnt know how to select who was worthy of being verified and why those people were worthy and others were not. So they found a solution. One of the criteria they used to determine if someone was notable to be verified was to check out the number of DMs said person from other verified accounts. Getting DMs from verified accounts meant you were notable too. E.g an obscure music producer getting DMs from different big musicians meant he was notable even though he wasnt famous. Afterall some notable people work behind the scenes. Jimmy Rex's Show have had some great people on the podcast. In Misplaced Pages we call those "associates". Lots of people who have Misplaced Pages articles have been guests at his show. A non notable podcaster wont pull notable guests to his podcast.

There is something else I should point out. There was a debate about Giannis Antetokounmpo, and how his opening sentence should be worded. The bone of contention was whether he should be labeled as a Greek or a Nigerian-Greek. What put that argument to rest was a video from YouTube. In the video he said that he represents both Nigeria and Greece. These are the scenarios when Youtube videos can be employed. In Jimmy Rex's case, these notable guests are talking by themselves for themselves. You watch the video and see them. It is verifiable. When you say primary source, do you know that you mean that the words are coming from Jimmy Rex's mouth? And in this case, are they? Cokeandbread (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Please read what WP:SOURCING is, because I'm not going to explain it to you. It details the different types and the fact that your article is a raging advertisement sourced to blackhat SEO doesn't help. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 22:05, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:YOUTUBE-EL.

And about SEO blackhatting, you are simply projecting, because I never had the intention for such. Cokeandbread (talk) 22:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Please explain how I am projecting? What does that mean? GRINCHIDICAE🎄 22:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Here are some signs that you might be projecting onto me:

• You make assumptions about my intentions. With no good faith.

• You accuse me of doing something that you yourself might be guilty of.

• You seem overly sensitive to my words or actions, as if you’re taking them personally. Cokeandbread (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Define projecting. Cause this isn't it. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 22:33, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I dont have time for this. Cokeandbread (talk) 22:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Radio, and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Not seeing in-depth independent coverage in reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. A ref-bombed promo article, most likely COI/paid editing. Edwardx (talk) 23:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

  When I created the article, I wrote a sub section about his controversy and I was asked to remove it because it was negative. Now, the article seems like a promo because it is too nice? Okay.

  Also Read WP:YOUTUBE-EL. Cokeandbread (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

  I recommended that the controversy section be removed because controversy sections are generally a poor idea, especially on a biography of a living person. Vice News was not a strong enough source to justify it. Reconrabbit 15:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Every single source is either a passing mention, not independent of the subject, or about a different subject entirely (referring to one of his guests). Plus, there is WP:TRIVIA being used to puff up the citations list: Guatemala is one of his favorite travel destinations? An NBA star crashed one of his parties? Who TF cares. Not notable. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep A Misplaced Pages article with minimal citations but clear notability. Deletion of notable Misplaced Pages pages because of fewer citations can set a dangerous precedent. Gracefoundme (talk) 08:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

  It looks to me like there are plenty of citations, but many of them are weak in terms of reliability and are not independent of Jimmy Rex. Reconrabbit 15:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

  Alright. Cokeandbread (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Gracefoundme: what do you mean "minimal citations but clear notability"? How is notability met if not via WP:GNG? GNG doesn't require a lot of sources of course but it does require enough depth. What are these sources to establish the level of coverage needed for GNG? Nil Einne (talk) 02:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. From what I see I believe the Misplaced Pages article is notable. The creating editor seems naive so I think it is creator issue, not a notability issue. Keep and keep improving. Wallclockticking (talk) 18:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks. I am learning. Cokeandbread (talk) 08:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as the article currently is written. I'm of the opinion that controversy often makes a person notable. Recent examples of articles that I've saved because of bad reviews or controversy include Topaz (novel) and The Legend That Was Earth. Another article is Sangre Grande Regional Complex, often described as a white elephant. Many a bad broadcaster has achieved notability by having outrageous guests. I'm glad to change my !vote if critiques are added back in. Bearian (talk) 05:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  Good day Bearian. Following your instructions, I added his critiques. I dont know if it is sufficient to change your mind though. Cokeandbread (talk) 08:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  Hello sir Cokeandbread (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, because many influential podcasters are notable despite limited traditional media coverage. The reason why is because podcast is the new media and traditional citations don't yet know how to do justice to podcasters' influence. Their reach, engagement, and cultural relevance often exceed those of traditionally cited sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdhoul 138 (talk • contribs) time, day month year (UTC)
• Delete as written as it's clearly promotional, but I'm also not sure a neutral article is possible based on the available sources. SportingFlyer T·C 03:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - Article is consistent with other Misplaced Pages podcasting WP:POD articles from what I see. Amaekuma (talk) 20:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  That's a WP:WHATABOUTX argument, not a valid rationale. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as in its current state, the article covers his achievements and controversies, giving a balanced view that fits Misplaced Pages’s standards. Miss Dike 16:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  "his achievements and controversies" does not contribute to any notability standard. Dclemens1971 (talk) 04:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Google search show this article has independent secondary reliable source with a significant coverage. Thus, it has pass GNG. Again, , , and are enough to establish notability. 102.91.104.221 (talk) 08:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  USA Today is not about this individual, he's only mentioned and has a quote. The other sources aren't RS. Oaktree b (talk) 01:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. A WP:REFBOMB of primary source Q&As, WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS, press releases, affiliated sources (eg official bios), student media, etc. Not a single source is WP:SIGCOV in an independent, secondary, reliable source. Total WP:GNG/WP:NBIO failure and highly promotional as well. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. No valid secondary sourcing to prove WP:GNG.TitCrisse (talk) 03:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Almost evenly divided between editors arguing to Keep this article and those advocating Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 23:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Non-notable podcast person. There are no articles in RS about this individual; what's used in the article are trivial mentions or non-RS. I can't find any we can use either. Oaktree b (talk) 01:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Comment to closer: The discussion may at present look evenly divided, but the "keep" !votes are either not policy based or offer sources that other !voters have rebutted. It is also unusual that this particular discussion has attracted so many "keep" !votes from accounts that are participating in AfD for either the first (Gracefoundme, Miss Dike and obviously the IP) or second (Wallclockticking, Abdhoul 138) time. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  You create articles with 7 references or less. Even if I want to learn how to create articles, it will not be from you. Rest. Cokeandbread (talk) 19:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. All sources seem either unreliable or non-substantial. I only saw one source that could be deemed as establishing GNG, but until we see more, this is most appropriately deleted. Madeleine (talk) 19:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Lol. Cokeandbread (talk) 20:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

You ought to stop with the WP:BLUDGEON. It does not help your case in any way. Madeleine (talk) 20:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I am very civil and contributing to Misplaced Pages to make a great encyclopedia, not trying to WP:SATISFY you. Cokeandbread (talk) 21:12, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

And just how is responding to every Delete vote forming a consensus? Madeleine (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete The references are either passing mentions, written by Jimmy Rex or interviews with him. There doesn't seem to be any independent sources for him. Fails WP:GNG. One of the references wouldn't open for me but that's not uncommon with American sites when accessing them from the UK. Knitsey (talk) 21:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: The article on Jimmy Rex should be kept because Jimmy Rex is notable in multiple fields as a podcast host and the producer of 20th Century Fox movie, Once I Was a Beehive. NOTE: this is an unsigned post from Cokeandbread, who has has already voted above. Edwardx (talk) 22:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep, as the subject meets notability standards. The article provides key information and serves as a basis for further development. Pruddyyyy (talk) 15:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  19 edits. Joined 20 December. Hmm. Edwardx (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  And the edits that I looked at were minor wording ("i.e. from ] to ]) which look to me like an attempt to build up some edit stats. Has anyone looked for WP:SOCK evidence? The "keep" responses here have some characteristics in common, IMO. Lamona (talk) 22:49, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah, note that there is an ongoing SPI for all keep !votes so far in here.YuniToumei (talk) 20:48, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

  I have been called a COI editor, a paid editor, a sock, a nonsense editor and all these bad names just because I decided to create an article. I have been on Misplaced Pages for 2 months and I have been called more bad names and accused of More insulting allegations within that time than I have been faced in years of my real life. I'm starting to think it isnt worth it. Cokeandbread (talk) 21:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Author of the page in question has been indeffed on grounds of WP:NOTHERE and utter disreputability, including a possible COI. Borgenland (talk) 09:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Delete this whole article frankly reads like a bad trivia section.Insanityclown1 (talk) 01:25, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No source meets the combined criteria of reliable, secondary, and in-depth so the subject fails WP:GNG. --Richard Yin (talk) 08:30, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:GNG. Lavalizard101 (talk) 10:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete looks more of a resume than an article. Also fails WP:NBIO as no RS found talking about the guy Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Naveen Nazim

Naveen Nazim (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)

Non notable actor/ assistant director. His claim to fame is as the brother of popular actress Nazriya Nazim and brother in law of Fahadh Faasil. Does not seem to meet the requirements of WP:NACTOR. Jupitus Smart 21:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, India, and Kerala. Jupitus Smart 21:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. While there are several sources discussing his engagement and marriage, these mainly highlight his connection as a sibling of a notable actor rather than establishing his own significance. The remaining sources are primarily interview coverages. His notability is not yet independently established.--— MimsMENTOR 10:03, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - one film is almost never enough to pass NACTOR standards. If every run of the mill assistant director had an article, then my best buddy from college would have an article here (hint: he's not notable). Bearian (talk) 20:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Poor sources. Fails WP:NACTOR who has no significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or made any unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. RangersRus (talk) 01:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. 190.219.101.225 (talk) 06:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 merge‎ to Pornography in Bangladesh. Liz 22:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Jazmin Chaudhry

Jazmin Chaudhry (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 fails to meet the WP:ENT or WP:BIO. The subject lacks significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Existing references are either trivial mentions or lack the depth required to establish notability. ―  ☪  Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 19:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bangladesh. ―  ☪  Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 19:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Sexuality and gender. Spiderone 19:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: The first three sources in Bengali are apparently addressing her career directly, though... -Mushy Yank. 23:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Mushy Yank Yes, I agree. The first two Bengali sources were significant, but they were just one-time mentions, not sustained coverage. even if you search "জেজমিন" "যায় যায় দিন" or "জেজমিন" "যুগান্তর" will result zero. Daily Fulki, on the other hand, isn't an established or notable publication in Bangladesh, making its coverage less reliable for notability assessment. ―  ☪  Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 08:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Today, I found an older AfD from 2011 with a result of delete: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jazmin. Due to the mentioning surname, it wasn’t automatically linked to this discussion. ―  ☪  Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 10:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you. That was 13 years ago, though. -Mushy Yank. 12:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  Given the 2 reliable sources and a half in Bengali, may I suggest a merge into Pornography in Bangladesh mentioning in a section People that she was the first Bangladeshi-born pornographic actress and whatever material other users judge suitable for a merge? -Mushy Yank. 12:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  Merge is a solution, maybe. ―  ☪  Kapudan Pasha (🧾 - 💬) 08:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Given there was a prior AFD on this article subject, Soft Deletion is not an option. Is there more support for a Merge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 23:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• Merge per discussion. Mehedi Abedin 20:57, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Astonishing that it's even being questioned, unless Misplaced Pages is (Personal attack removed).MisterWizzy (talk) 11:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Keep or Merge I think it would be better if its a merge Codonified (talk) 12:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Kudos to Guliolopez for their diligent effort to source this article. Owen× ☎ 02:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Kealan Patrick Burke

Kealan Patrick Burke (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 subject appears to fail WP:GNG as well as higher bars at WP:NACTOR and WP:NAUTHOR. Note, not every Bram Stoker Award recipient is inherently notable. JFHJr (㊟) 00:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Authors. JFHJr (㊟) 00:17, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Article having a single primary source since 2006 when it was created. Before search indicate that this person fails WP:NAUTHOR. Mekomo (talk) 13:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. While not offering a specific recommendation right now (WP:BEFORE still ongoing), the SPA/COI/PROMO nature of the article's creation is somewhat difficult to overlook. Also, while I've found (and added) a handful of sources to address the otherwise almost entirely uncited body, none of these sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. A search for biographical sources returns only the types of WP:INTERVIEWS (common for most authors and not contributory to notability) and the types of "writers bio" written by publishers/distributors/etc (not WP:INDEPENDENT and therefore also not normally supportive of a notability claim). As the subject is Irish, I searched in the usual "mainstream" national news sources in Ireland (Irish Times, Irish Independent, Irish Examiner, RTÉ, etc) - and could find NOTHING AT ALL. As the subject is from County Waterford, I also looked in "local" Waterford news sources - and could only find this "listicle" - where the subject is only mentioned in passing. Will continue with BEFORE when I have time. But, as it stands, I can find nothing to support retention... Guliolopez (talk) 13:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - the Bram Stoker Awards is a good source, but it's literally a paragraph. None of the other sources contribute to significant coverage. Ping me if you find more. Bearian (talk) 05:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Sandstein 21:36, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Aryan Hasan

Aryan Hasan (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:NACTOR. Not enough notability to warrant a standalone article, at least not at this time. CycloneYoris 20:04, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. CycloneYoris 20:04, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. non notable actor. The sources in the article say it all. Mekomo (talk) 13:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Totally Non-notable actor and singer, does not have any coverage in any reliable source. I have fixed the citations, it's only three. Actor played small roles in the notable films, that does not proves notability. Taabii (talk) 13:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete non notable actor Even a simple google search turns up either his social media or some random blogpost The AP (talk) 16:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 14:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Eldon Howard

• Articles for deletion/Eldon Howard
• Articles for deletion/Eldon Howard (2nd nomination)

Eldon Howard (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)

Hasn't changed since previous AFD. JayCubby 02:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. JayCubby 02:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete unclear why the article was kept per no consensus in the previous AfD. Allan Nonymous (talk) 22:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 03:48, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Fail to meet WP:GNG in WP:CREATIVE. QEnigma talk 14:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 01:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Saiyar Mori Re

• Articles for deletion/Saiyar Mori Re
• Articles for deletion/Saiyar Mori Re (2nd nomination)

Saiyar Mori Re (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)

Unable to find independent sources with significant coverage. The existing sources about and around "Saiyar Mori Re" are mostly routine coverage and paid PR/brand content, failing WP:NFSOURCES. I am also unable to find the minimum number of full length reviews, so it fails WP:NFILM entirely. The sources mentioned in the previous XfD are paid PR, as evident from the bylines and reviews from unknown websites/blogs. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Artists, Film, India, and Gujarat. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

  Why was this added to the Actors and Filmmakers list? It's a film not a person. -Mushy Yank. 19:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: See precedent AfD and arguments presented by User:DareshMohan, for example. A redirect seems warranted anyway (same comment) so that I am opposed to deletion. -Mushy Yank. 19:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

  Freelance journalist/blogger, Brand promoted content and an article from an unknown website with no byline? Can you please read the nomination statement and WP:NFILM guideline once again and consider revising your rationale to a policy based one instead of how you feel about deletion? Here are some more PR articles that they have given out: , , Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

  Can you please read DareshMohan's argument? Gujarat is not a "country" but I consider the film meets NFILM's inclusionary criterion #3, if you really wish me to provide a link to a guideline. I'll stand by my !vote, if I may. I've added a couple of things to the page, rapidly. -Mushy Yank. 20:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

  All you have added so far is just brand promoted content, routine coverage and passing mentions with no bylines. Nearly five years on Misplaced Pages, yet how you interpret WP:NFIC to fit your own views is astonishing.

  Here, "distributed domestically in a country" means distributed within India. This film didn't see the light outside Gujarat and we are not maintaining a database of films released in India, but rather of notable films released in India. Comparing WP:NFIC#3's weight of a film being released/distributed domestically in a country is nowhere close to that of a film being distributed within a state. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  "didn't see the light outside Gujarat" is an absurd rationale. Indian cinema, being the largest producer of films globally, comprises multiple industries based on language and regional distinctions. The subject here being included in the Gujarati cinema, though less prominent than its counterparts like Bollywood or Tollywood, is still a significant part of this spectrum. Drawing a comparison between Gujarati cinema and the broader, more commercially dominant segments of Indian cinema is flawed. Keep in mind that Misplaced Pages:Notability is not a level playing field. — MimsMENTOR 07:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  Don't bring essays here. If you want to change existing policies, start an RFC at Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (films).

  The current guidelines only support films that are successfully distributed domestically in a country that is not a major film-producing country. You have contradicted yourself by mentioning "Indian cinema, being the largest producer of films globally". WP:NFIC#3 does not apply to major film producing countries and if Saiyar Mori Re were a significant part of this spectrum, it would have received reviews in reliable sources. Instead, it only has paid PR. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  Keep your tone out! this is a discussion space, essays, statements, facts and all are legit here. — MimsMENTOR 09:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: It seems the nominator has completely overlooked sources from TOI and other reputable outlets (which still lack full consensus on reliability). With that, giving an additional consideration and collectively reviewing the coverage's from the sources from TOI, TOI 2, TOI 3, One India and from the Gujarati media: navgujaratsamay, gujaratheadline and abtakmedia as well as the film's feature at the International Gujarati Film Festival 2023 is enough for notability.--— MimsMENTOR 09:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  • TOI - Interview / Not independent / Pre-release coverage - Jun 14, 2022 (Part of PR)
  • One India - Partner content as indicated at the top - July 14, 2022 (Part of PR)
  • navgujaratsamay - Press release from trailer launch - Jun 27 (Part of PR)
  • gujaratheadline - Same as navgujaratsamay article / Press release from trailer launch - Jun 25 (Part of PR)
  • abtakmedia - Same as above / Press release from trailer launch - July 04, 2022
  • International Gujarati Film Festival 2023 - Trivial mention / no awards

  None of the above news media outlets covered or reviewed the film after its release. It seems you have overlooked both the sources and the nomination rationale. Would you mind sharing your source analysis below? Mims Mentor Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Jeraxmoira Before diving into a source analysis, could you clarify or provide evidence for your claim that each of all sources mentioned are "(part of PR)"? — MimsMENTOR 11:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  The lack of coverage following the film's release is sufficient evidence. Apart from that, the OneIndia article is marked as "Partner Content". As for the trailer launch, inviting all the news media is standard practice and has been done this way consistently. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  I see your point about the "partner content", I do agree with that. However, when I emphasized the need for "collective reviewing" and "additional consideration" of the sources. I recognize that the coverage may not be strong enough to 'firmly keep' the article, but your own analysis doesn't solidly push for deletion either, leaning more towards WP:BARE. As for PR evidence, there isn't concrete proof to back up that claim you made (when you are talking about policies). Pre-release/press release (earned media) coverage isn’t inherently promotional, and reputable outlets like TOI often feature pre-release interviews without the coverage being purely PR-driven. — MimsMENTOR 12:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  You are bringing in more essays to XfDs. Please understand that essays are not P&G and hold no significant value in XfDs. The TOI sources are insufficient for a standalone article, especially given that there are literally zero reviews available. There are three articles about the trailer launch featuring the same banner image, yet you believe this isn't sufficient evidence that the press was invited to the event. The sources here are nowhere close to meeting GNG or NFILM. If you disagree, please provide a source analysis that might help me better understand your point of view. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  Essays arent binding, but they offer relevant interpretations in debates like XfDs, especially for borderline cases. Dismissing them outright doesnt negate their value in offering nuance. The TOI sources, while not extensive, still provide verifiable coverage. Prerelease coverage is common, even for non-blockbuster films. Moreover, you havent fully explained why multiple outlets covering the same trailer launch definitively proves PR involvement. The case is WP:BARE now. I believe I’ve made it clear what aspects of the discussion align with GNG, based on policy guidelines. The nominator seems fixated on a single point and dismisses valid considerations by labeling them "essays," which is unproductive. Since the conversation is going in circles, I’ll be stepping back. I suggest exploring more sources from Gujarati media to verify additional coverage of the film instead of narrowing the focus to a single angle.--— MimsMENTOR 14:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  So, no source analysis? Cool. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  Why? to count in more essay? Sorry No! — MimsMENTOR 15:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: These sources can be used to write an article, but they certainly do not meet the standards required to establish GNG and there are no sources available after the film's release. Regarding WP:NFILM, there are literally no reviews for this film, despite it being released in the internet era. The fact that all the sources below greatly appreciate the film, its songs, trailer and its success, yet none of them have published a review, is quite amusing.

Source assessment table

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movie-details/saiyar-mori-re/movieshow/92209803.cms				✘ No
https://www.aninews.in/news/business/business/k-brothers-produced-saiyar-mori-re-wins-the-hearts-of-the-audience-as-anticipated-after-the-trailer-release20220713132245/	Story is provided by GPRC (Global PR Connect)			✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movies/news/saiyar-mori-re-new-song-manda-lidha-mohi-raj-is-winning-hearts-on-the-internet/articleshow/92653580.cms	Entertainment Desk / No byline			✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movies/news/mayur-chauhan-on-saiyar-mori-re-i-am-feeling-akhand-mauj-exclusive/articleshow/92200116.cms	Interview			✘ No
https://www.zee5.com/articles/k-brothers-produced-saiyar-mori-re-wins-the-hearts-of-the-audience-as-anticipated-after-the-trailer-release	Story is provided by GPRC (Global PR Connect)			✘ No
https://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/2022/Jul/08/meet-kariyas-saiyar-mori-re-celebrates-rural-flavours-of-india-2474459.html	Express News Service / No byline		~	✘ No
https://www.oneindia.com/partner-content/jay-kariyas-debut-film-saiyar-mori-re-is-out-now-and-the-audience-can-t-get-enough-of-it-3433537.html	Partner content			✘ No
https://www.mynation.com/entertainment/film-saiyar-mori-re-wins-over-the-audience-despite-its-experimental-approach-filmmakers-express-sigh-snt-reuiuy	featured content / No byline			✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movies/news/watch-saiyar-mori-re-makers-will-soon-drop-a-teaser/articleshow/92082623.cms	Entertainment Desk / No byline			✘ No
https://www.ahmedabadmirror.com/gujarati-films-go-global/81859967.html			Passing mention	✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movies/news/mayur-chauhan-unveils-the-first-look-of-his-saiyar-mori-re/articleshow/92034340.cms	Interview		Routine coverage from an Instagram Post	✘ No
https://navgujaratsamay.com/love-story-based-film-saiyar-mori-re--a-turning-point-in-the-gujarati-film-industrys-history/221700.html	Trailer launch press release			✘ No
https://www.gujaratheadline.com/%e0%aa%b9%e0%aa%b0%e0%aa%bf-%e0%aa%95%e0%aa%b0%e0%ab%87-%e0%aa%8f-%e0%aa%b8%e0%aa%be%e0%aa%9a%e0%ab%81/	Trailer launch press release			✘ No
https://www.abtakmedia.com/god-do-is-the-best-rural-areas-love-story-sayer-mori-re/	Abtak Media / No byline			✘ No
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/gujarati/movies/news/the-international-gujarati-film-festival-igff-returns-with-its-4th-edition-in-chicago-usa-this-year-exclusive/articleshow/101098950.cms			Passing mention	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

• Delete - WP:NEWSORGINDIA applies to many of these references. The sources assessment shows these to not be reliable as far as notability is concerned. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Source assessment table is thoroughly convincing. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 05:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Weak delete. The best source I could find that wasn't clearly sponsored content was this, and IMHO that isn't enough. The other material is either sponsored, or less substantive. It's not nothing, though, and it's possible I am missing material in other languages, although I did search using the transliterated title. If the director or producer were notable, there is perhaps enough coverage to insert a few sentences into their biographies, but I see we do not have articles about them. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Source analysis above sums it up. Not much in RS, nothing we can use to build an article with. Oaktree b (talk) 12:55, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The source assessment table shows that the article fails WP:GNG and WP:NFSOURCES. It also does not meet WP:NFILM's inclusionary criterion No. 3 since India is a major film producing country.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Fails WP:NFILM criteria for notability. RangersRus (talk) 01:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 redirect‎ to Happu Ki Ultan Paltan#Cast. Thanks to editors who worked to track down sources. In the end though, they were not strong enough to convince other editors to argue to Keep this article. Liz 01:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Kamna Pathak

• Articles for deletion/Kamna Pathak
• Articles for deletion/Kamna Pathak (2nd nomination)

Kamna Pathak (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)

Looking at the sources, it does not pass WP:GNG even. Mostly all the sources available on google are discussing her replacement in a notable show, see , , . Taabii (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Entertainment, India, and Madhya Pradesh. Taabii (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 14:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast: as the nominator indicates she is best known for that role and coverage attesting of that exists. -Mushy Yank. 10:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast. Not opposed to Delete. RangersRus (talk) 14:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: The actress has worked in multiple notable TV shows, a primary Google search results indicate significant coverage in reliable sources. Zuck28 (talk) 15:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Zuck28 Thanks for your comment, for a better understanding i appreciate you to please present those RS here? Happy editing. Taabii (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

  I have added a few sources and updated the article, I will try to improve to the article in my free time.

  Zuck28 (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Now adequately sourced.--Ipigott (talk) 08:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Ipigott Most of the sources are Interviews, kindly check it. — Taabii (talk) 12:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

• The sources are quite poor and not independent of the subject with claims and interviews. Subject fails the criteria for WP:NACTOR who did not have significant roles in "multiple" notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. RangersRus (talk) 16:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep The sources are reliable, and the subject is well-researched with verifiable claims.

𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 04:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further discussion on the sources added. Keep !votes, kindly comment based on our P&Gs and after giving a detailed analysis of the sources based on those P&Gs with a clear rationale why the article should be kept, not mere statements saying the sources are good.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 19:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast: Has only one notable role, so it's more appropriate to redirect, fails WP:NACTOR. I'm also open to deletion, as most sources are interviews (decent coverage, yet do not establish notability).--— MimsMENTOR 18:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No valid secondary sources to prove WP:GNG. TitCrisse (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete I can't find anything but interviews for this lady. No independent coverage. She has acted in one TV show, and what looks like an extra(?) in a film. I have done a search (searches from the UK aren't always good these days), I would be happy to re-evaluate my vote if idependent sources can be found. At the moment, this article doesn't demonstrate it complies with WP:GNG.Knitsey (talk) 16:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect I agree it should be Redirect to Happu_Ki_Ultan_Paltan#Cast. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hendrea44 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. A source assessment would be helpful here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 02:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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. Liz 23:23, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Jason-Shane Scott

Jason-Shane Scott (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 struggled to find significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources during my WP:BEFORE (there are a few interviews on soap opera related websites, but nothing of substance to my mind. The one significant role in One Life to Live does not meet the bar for WP:NACTOR, and so I submit that the subject is not notable. I proposed a Redirect to One Life to Live. The article is also not written from a terribly neutral point of view either, but that is somewhat by-the-by. SunloungerFrog (talk) 10:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, and United States of America. SunloungerFrog (talk) 10:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: California and Nevada. Spiderone 17:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
• Procedural close as the nominator does not advocate deletion. The article can be boldly redirected as desired. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry, I didn't mean to be unclear. I do think that the article should be deleted. My suggestion of redirection was as an alternative to deletion, and I wanted to get some consensus before doing that. Cheers SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Meets WP:NACTOR, had a notable known role in One Life to Live and a notable recurring role in the web series The Bay. He also appeared in numerous films and television programs. He also meets WP:GNG from the sources found in Newspapers.com, Jason-Shane Scott: Acting based on looks along isn't true success (The Times and Democrat), 'One Life' actor Scott has family members who are there for him (Richmond Times-Dispatch), To Scott, talent counts more than looks (Austin American-Statesman), Dream come true: Wooster star get soap job; Diller goes undercover; Springer visits (Reno Gazette-Journal) and Jason-Shane Scott follows destiny on 'OLTL' (Oakland Tribune). Those five Newspapers.com sources shows that the article meets WP:GNG. MoviesandTelevisionFan (talk) 02:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per sources found by OwenX. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Sources listed above are enough for GNG. Also passes NACTOR through roles in Shrieker, Curse of the Puppet Master and One Life to Live. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 16:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 Draftify‎. Admittedly, this is a result no one asked for. But while I see a pretty clear consensus for deletion, there's clearly some promise here, and I'll take BusterD up on their implied offer. Also, since he's 100 in 2025, we may be about to get some retrospective coverage that will help. asilvering (talk) 01:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Michael Beint

Michael Beint (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 don't see any significant coverage. Likely doesn't pass WP:NACTOR due to insignificant roles in films which are also difficult to verify due to the lack of reliable sources. Frost 15:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and England. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Per the nomination. Everyone who appeared in a Broadway show is not thereby notable. This article lacks WP:RS citations and is fails WP:GNG criterion. I vote delete. Go4thProsper (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways 23:21, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mojo Hand (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: As You Like It only ran for 8 performances on Broadway. It toured elsewhere, but this is the only review I can find with Beint mentioned -- which is really not sigcov of him as an actor -- and there's hardly any appearances of his name in the GNews archive (though this is obviously a far from complete repository, particularly of The Times). Even if something approaching sigcov of his AYLI role could be found, we'd likely still need additional sigcov for his other acting. His IMDB listing shows guest and short recurring TV roles, and what looks like minor movie roles. HydroniumHydroxide 02:38, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• We need clarification as to whether having a large body of professional work as a character actor counts for NACTOR. I see literally hundreds of hits in Google books and news about all his roles, including a few longer reviews like this. Many seem to be mere listings or a few blogs like this. Not sure what to do with marginal cases like this. Bearian (talk) 22:37, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  Admins, since I got no response, please mark me as weak keep per WP:BARE. Bearian (talk) 15:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  WP:NACTOR mentions "prolific" contributions as one of its criteria. Keep. There is coverage in reviews on various of his signficant theater roles and his numerous film/TV roles are verifiable (some can be considered significant, including the one in The Hi-Jackers or The Witchfinder General for example). His life can be sourced through things like https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17310736.rodbourne-couple-celebrate-70-years-wedded-bliss/. -Mushy Yank. 08:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist as arguments are now evenly divided between editors arguing to Keep this article and those advocating Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 00:23, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Not seeing subject having 1) significant roles in 2) multiple 3) notable productions, per WP:NACTOR. The source cited above is about Beint's marriage, with his body of work as a performance as an afterthought. Longhornsg (talk) 01:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  The source I mentioned is merely and solely to source his personal life not to prove his notability. -Mushy Yank. 07:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Despite his body of work, a search turned up no significant independent coverage. 💥Casualty 05:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete He is not WP:NOTABLE. Simply working as a journeyman actor, or even making a career out of it, does not merit a Wiki article. He fails to meet WP:GNG criteria and has few credible WP:RS citations either. Go4thProsper (talk) 17:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: This is not just about a working actor; instead about a vast body of work of character roles in film and television, but mostly about an illustrious theater career as stage leads on West End and in the UK. The source linked above by Bearian (a reference volume about notable productions of plays by Shakespeare) discusses the subject's 1954 title role in Sir Thomas More, the next production it discusses is Ian McKellen's 1964 portrayal in the same role. This article in The Nation mentions the subject's appearance in a 1986 London Royal National Theater performance of Pravda (play) (by David Hare) opposite a young Anthony Hopkins in "the best performance of his career". (I'm presuming if you're co-starring with Hopkins onstage every night, you must be a respected actor.) This guy is not merely a working actor, he's been a working (and often leading) theater actor for over 60 years, doing his last television appearance in 2010. One more thing: this fellow will turn 100 years old in 2025, and he's worked with actors from Margaret Rutherford to Cate Blanchette. I suspect the reason he appeared in so many films and tv shows (135 different titles) is that his face and work was already so familiar in the British theater community (mostly from the National). I'm aware my "day late and dollar short" keep assertion may not impress, but I'll bet if I had access to more London theater reviews I'd find abundant direct detailing. If deleted, I may research a new draft. BusterD (talk) 10:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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 redirect‎ to I Love New York (TV series). ✗plicit 04:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Mauricio Sanchez

Mauricio Sanchez (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)

Declined PROD; apparently, it was PRODded years before. Old article. Fails a WP:BEFORE search. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Venezuela. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect - Couldn't find any decent secondary sources with significant coverage at all to support WP:NACTOR. As an alternative to deletion, consider redirect to I Love New York (TV series) as this was pretty much his only role of any significance. SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is support for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz 03:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 _Work 03:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• I think this fails WP:NACTOR and all other guidelines, so a "delete" would be appropriate, but no objection to a redirect as an AtD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

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) — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Naved Aslam

• Articles for deletion/Naved Aslam
• Articles for deletion/Naved Aslam (2nd nomination)

Naved Aslam (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:NACTOR. Unsourced BLP. No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV scope_creep 14:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood (talk) 16:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
• There is a reference so it's not unreferenced, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: The subject has worked in numerous movies and has also been part of multiple television shows. Previously, the article relied on a single source, but I have now added several new sources to improve its credibility. The subject clearly meets the criteria outlined in WP:ENT. Baqi:) (talk) 12:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 _Work 14:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As it stands now there clearly is not a consensus for any course of action. Hopefulyy another week will remedy that.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Step Sideways 01:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: A notable actor, active since 90s, worked in multiple notable filmd and Tv Shows, passes WP:NACTOR. Zuck28 (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Proposed deletions

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

Categories

• Misplaced Pages deletion sorting
• WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers