Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Savyo

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. Aoidh (talk) 00:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Savyo[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Existing sources are nothing but some passing mentions. Search on google shows up list of some of his works. Thesixserra (talk) 06:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Entertainment, and India. Thesixserra (talk) 06:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:MUSICBIO, as he is famous for top level of his Remixs. The article need to be improved from these sources [1], and might fit better in the biographies of the musician. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.210.180.151 (talk) 07:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Hindu article and Times of India article are detailed article about this DJ Artist. Not just passing mention as quoted above. Heard of this DJ many times in TV Christopheronthemove (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:55, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for a more thorough consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shawn Teller (talk) 23:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Poorly sourced article and irrelevant argument by editors who voted in favour here. Heard of this DJ many times in TV , He is famous for top level of his Remix. These all are poor arguments. There were no reliable sources available when a Google search was done. Only passing mentions in sources and no other valid claim for notability. 42.105.230.87 (talk) 07:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Has WP:RS. SuperSharanya (talk) 13:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:Between [2] and [3], you just took a minute. This implies that you haven't even gone through the sources properly. 42.108.124.19 (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The sources in the article clearly exceed "passing mentions". Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:52, 28 March 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.