Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ajit Ravi Pegasus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Courcelles (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ajit Ravi Pegasus[edit]

Ajit Ravi Pegasus (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)

The article fails to establish why it is notable. Director has only directed one low-key film. Best to redirected to Ravu(talk) 00:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The nominator says the subject has only directed one film. but the article about the subject in Pravasi Express - https://www.pravasiexpress.com/ajit-ravi-pegasuss-next-movie-venture-august-27-is-all-set-to-release/ clearly states August 27 is his 3rd movie. The first movie Ravu is censored and released in Kerala theatres as Malayalam Movie in 2013. Second movie Thottal Vidathu was censored and released as a Tamil movie in Tamil Nadu in 2014 and the 3rd movie August 27 which completed it's production and waiting release as per lot of news sources. Thus clearly passes and cannot be tagged WP:Too early. Moreover he is notable for a controversy which was subject for most of the newspapers and he is also known as the show director of many important beauty contests like Miss South India, Mrs South India, Miss Asia etc..

Also he did the main lead role in the movie Ravu and Thottal Vidathu and directed and produced 3 movies. So clearly he has done "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and thus clearly should be kept Christopheronthemove (talk) 03:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete :Fails WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER. Being involved in controversy does not offer you a Wikipedia page. All the sources are about some of his movies. This clearly fails the standards of wikipedia's notability. A person cannot be also notable because of some paparazzi news coverage about their illicit relationship. 112.133.211.182 (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment Clossing admin please note this IP came from no where. His first edit after hibernation from 2018 is here. I doubt its either the nominator or someone close to them Christopheronthemove (talk) 14:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment Clossing admin please note that the above deletion comment is by the nominator himself. He has not signed the nomination and the comment and also I doubt if delete vote is legally possible for nominator himself in AFD ? Christopheronthemove (talk) 14:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - when I see such strong feelings for one to nominate and then vote without signing, I always start suspecting the nomination is valid. So I'm looking at the article, and I think it's well-sourced although more work is needed, definitely not for deletion though. ShahidTalk2me 09:41, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello Shahid. That is an unwarranted conclusion, based on someone just forgetting to add their signature. WP:AGF please. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:52, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Done one film and another one yet to release. There is very weak coverage from sources. It is not enough pass WP:GNG. 117.254.35.179 (talk) 14:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.