- 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) Lourdes 01:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nikhil Gowda ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable actor with not even one released film to his name. Delete as per WP:NACTOR, WP:TOOSOON. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Sources here.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 20:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: But the subject does not pass
WP:NARTIST. The subject is essentially known for acting in 1 movie (not yet released). All the references are in the context of the movie and is essentially
WP:BLP1E. There is nothing which suggests that the subject is notable independent of the single movie. This is too soon to have a Wikipedia article. Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
00:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nonsense. @
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:, wondering how you might explain over
1500 pageviews in one day? Yes, I know, pageviews are not an official count, but still, you're deleting something that 1,500 sets of eyeballs want to read.
This is an in-depth source. Ditto
this. There are many more sources. So, it's all about one movie, you say, so that makes it a BLP1E? Sure is a big movie, but Gowda has been in
other roles.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 12:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC) And, as guidelines go, the
general notability guideline overrides any specific guideline such as
NARTIST.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk)
12:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: You can't decide the article's notability just on number of the views right? Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
12:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Of course -- but you can think of it this way -- those 1500 people are like customers who want a product, and each customer could potentially re-float the article if it gets deleted -- so trying to delete this article is like trying to swim upstream against a raging flood. But forget the pageviews -- the sources are clearly there.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 13:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: You can't decide the article's notability just on number of the views right? Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
12:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nonsense. @
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:, wondering how you might explain over
1500 pageviews in one day? Yes, I know, pageviews are not an official count, but still, you're deleting something that 1,500 sets of eyeballs want to read.
This is an in-depth source. Ditto
this. There are many more sources. So, it's all about one movie, you say, so that makes it a BLP1E? Sure is a big movie, but Gowda has been in
other roles.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 12:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC) And, as guidelines go, the
general notability guideline overrides any specific guideline such as
NARTIST.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk)
12:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 00:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 00:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: Meets WP:GNG. Sources. Anup [Talk] 18:04, 11 September 2016 (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) Lourdes 01:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nikhil Gowda ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable actor with not even one released film to his name. Delete as per WP:NACTOR, WP:TOOSOON. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 12:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Sources here.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 20:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: But the subject does not pass
WP:NARTIST. The subject is essentially known for acting in 1 movie (not yet released). All the references are in the context of the movie and is essentially
WP:BLP1E. There is nothing which suggests that the subject is notable independent of the single movie. This is too soon to have a Wikipedia article. Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
00:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nonsense. @
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:, wondering how you might explain over
1500 pageviews in one day? Yes, I know, pageviews are not an official count, but still, you're deleting something that 1,500 sets of eyeballs want to read.
This is an in-depth source. Ditto
this. There are many more sources. So, it's all about one movie, you say, so that makes it a BLP1E? Sure is a big movie, but Gowda has been in
other roles.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 12:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC) And, as guidelines go, the
general notability guideline overrides any specific guideline such as
NARTIST.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk)
12:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: You can't decide the article's notability just on number of the views right? Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
12:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Of course -- but you can think of it this way -- those 1500 people are like customers who want a product, and each customer could potentially re-float the article if it gets deleted -- so trying to delete this article is like trying to swim upstream against a raging flood. But forget the pageviews -- the sources are clearly there.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 13:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- @
Tomwsulcer: You can't decide the article's notability just on number of the views right? Regards,
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (
talk •
mail)
12:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Nonsense. @
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga:, wondering how you might explain over
1500 pageviews in one day? Yes, I know, pageviews are not an official count, but still, you're deleting something that 1,500 sets of eyeballs want to read.
This is an in-depth source. Ditto
this. There are many more sources. So, it's all about one movie, you say, so that makes it a BLP1E? Sure is a big movie, but Gowda has been in
other roles.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk) 12:42, 4 September 2016 (UTC) And, as guidelines go, the
general notability guideline overrides any specific guideline such as
NARTIST.--
Tomwsulcer (
talk)
12:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 00:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 00:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: Meets WP:GNG. Sources. Anup [Talk] 18:04, 11 September 2016 (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.