Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hari Krishnan (actor)

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. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hari Krishnan (actor)

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

No significant coverage in independent reliable sources and no evidence that actor has played a major role in any film listed in the article. I may be looking in the wrong places, but a Google search for "Hari Krishnan" found nothing that establishes notability. Appear to be a case of WP:TOOSOON. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:00, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk|c|em) 13:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are few exclusive interviews sourced in the article. He has also been credited as "Hari" in films, I guess. Madras and Kabali are his notable films. Editor 2050 (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Editor 2050: Per WP:IV interviews are not generally considered useful for notability, as they are not independent of the subject. I tried but can’t find a single reliable source that talk about his role in either Madras or Kabali and I hope you are not mixing him with Kalaiyarasan Harikrishnan who played Tamizh Kumaran in Kabali also go with same name Harikrishnan. GSS (talk|c|em) 15:19, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep WP:IV is an essay not a policy, AFD is continually recognising interviews as notable sources where they are in reliable sources with a reputation for fact checking and also when they contain straight prose as well as an interview. Regarding WP:NACTOR he has third billing in an upcoming film and some fifth billings in released films which are reasonably prominent.Atlantic306 (talk) 15:28, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Of course, I'm aware - I watch Tamil films. Sources aren't as freely available for supporting actors as they are in the Western World - but I have attempted to include as many as possible here. Editor 2050 (talk) 10:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Editor 2050 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

Delete- At best he is a supporting actor with no work that has been notable, In my opinion until he does more prominent work this page is TOOSOON. FITINDIA 18:36, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: New sources and text has been added since this was listed. Editor 2050 (talk) 19:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lack of reliable references Shashi 1980 (talk) 15:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 17:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there are not enough sources to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:22, 23 September 2017 (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.