Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kambiz Dirbaz

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) J 947 ^{^{^{(c · m)}}} 05:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kambiz Dirbaz

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR nothing proves that his roles are significant or that the films are notable by WP standards. The film festival in which he won an award does not seem particularly notable itself Domdeparis (talk) 15:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep when I type "کامبیز دیرباز" in Google, I get literally hundreds of sources that confirm that Kambiz Dirbaz has had multiple leading roles in films and TV shows. For the sake of giving an example, this says he had the leading role in a TV series called نابرده رنج that was quite popular, and that he is back with the leading role in a series called میکائیل‌. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that please feel free to add them to the page. Domdeparis (talk) 19:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Award winning actor with a long filmography. Many sources appear to be available in Persian. Pburka (talk) 01:35, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Actor meets both the WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. I'm a little bit surprised about this nomination as Biwom unPRODded noting that much. Why AfD if there is no case for deletion? gidonb (talk) 22:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gidonb: A before search with his name (Kambiz Dirbaz) did not throw up much apart from a multitude of social media pages, the sources in the article are not sufficient to pass GNG or NACTOR, IMDB is user generated as is IMVbox, filmvandaag is a listing containing 1 film as I said I do not believe that the festival is itself particularly notable. This page does not "blatantly" pass GNG and NACTOR, as GNG states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" none of the sources meet this definition, NACTOR states that he has to meet one of the following criteria,

Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

I don't see anything in the article that shows he meets these criteria and even less so "blatantly". I am a little surprised that you agree with Biwom on this point. The number of GHITS is not important but the quality of the sources is. For the moment nobody has bothered to identify a source that shows he meets GNG or address the different criteria, so there is still a case for deletion. Domdeparis (talk) 09:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is all about quality and the following sources support passing the GNG and NACTOR (at the very least item 1): 1, 2, 3 and list goes on and on. There's almost no end to it. Then why this waste of time? gidonb (talk) 03:03, 28 November 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.