Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rani Hazarika (singer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pppery (talk | contribs) at 16:07, 13 April 2024 (Re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Rani Hazarika (singer)

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

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

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and Assam. WCQuidditch 16:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm not seeing any significant coverage except for pieces which are pretty obviously intended to be promotional, whether promoting her or the industry in general. I haven't found any honest neutral coverage, and that suggests GNG is not met. Basically the same concerns as the original discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While some of the projects she had helped to provide tracks stand on Wikipedia, I don't see her currently passing WP:GNG. All I find are just press releases that fail to provide any significant coverage of the subject.-- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I respectfully disagree with the proposal to delete Rani Hazarika's article. While I understand the concerns raised about potential promotional content, I believe there are sufficient neutral sources to establish her notability. Hazarika's contributions to the music industry, including her involvement in various projects and collaborations, have been documented in reputable sources beyond mere press releases. Moreover, her continued activity in the field since the previous deletion discussion indicates ongoing relevance. Therefore, I argue that the article should be kept, as it meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion.Rainylights (talk) 08:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a useless platitude that misunderstands the reason for deletion entirely and appears to be AI-generated. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While doing preliminary research, the articles and links that show up in google, even though most are press releases about different song releases and events she has been part of, but the articles happen to be published by some of the largest Newspapers and Portals in the country, like Times of India[1],[2], ANI [3], Hindustan Times [4], Financial Express [5], Deccan Chronicle [6] and India Today, The Print, IBTimes [7] among others, some mentioning her as a sensation and others speaking in similar words, while a number of portals carry her interviews and achievements and contributions, suggesting she is very well known. Hope the attached links help in arriving at better clarity about the decision. Hjeelani (talk) 09:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From a very quick glance, you have cites to The Times of India, which is useless for establishing notability. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Closer look. Cites 1, 2, and 4 are useless as explained above. Cite 5 is not significant coverage, and cite 7 is reporting on a non-notable award mill, therefore also useless. Given the lack of any byline and such I'm not convinced cite 6 is a reliable source. For Cite 3 see WP:RSPANI - it's not a reliable source. Also keep in mind Paid news in India when trying to establish the notability of India-related topics. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]