Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lakshmi Nakshathra

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. It appears to be borderline, though the reliability of The Times of India still remains marginal per WP:TOI. (non-admin closure) ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 13:00, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lakshmi Nakshathra[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)

Concerns of WP:GNG and WP:N. Subject fails WP:ENT. No reliable source found on a WP:BEFORE. The sources found does not appear to be reliable. Two of the sources are interviews. There are no secondary sources found. The awards won by the subject are also not notable. No major roles in the given film too, thus it fails WP:NACTOR. A major editor of the article removed {{notability}} tag with out explaining the reason, see. Sreeram Dilak 09:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sreeram Dilak

09:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Sreeram Dilak

09:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Sreeram Dilak

09:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. Sreeram Dilak

09:48, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete:As per nom. Fails GNG. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ)

@Krishnavilasom Bhageerathan Pilla: WP:PERNOM is no argument.--157.46.143.190 (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pillechan clearly states that the subject fails GNG.Sreeram Dilak 15:39, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Clearly satisfy WP:GNG, and notable as a television host, also satisfy WP:ENT for having significant roles in multiple television shows. Beside the three reliable secondary sources in the article [1][2][3] (other than interviews), there exist lots of "independent" reliable sources on the internet which are not interviews or mere mentions. A quick Google search gives significant coverage on the subject: The Times of India ([4][5][6][7][8][9]), Asianet News ([10][11][12]), Mangalam ([13]), Zee News ([14][15][16]), Vanitha ([17][18][19][20]), The Indian Express ([21][22][23]) to list a few. She was ranked among "Kochi Times Most Desirable Women on Television" in 2019 and 2020 by the Times of India. I request the closing admin to consider the merit of the arguments rather than vote counting.--157.46.143.190 (talk) 15:10, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These sources you provided did not qualify WP:GNG. Most of them are primary source. No useful secondary sources are found. --Sreeram Dilak 15:27, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets WP:ENT with sources presented by 157.46.143.190. They're secondary and reliable enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 01:49, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Sources presented by the IP does not pass GNG. Those are primary sources. --Agnihothri Sharath (talk) 02:35, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares what you think? They're definitely secondary sources and are reliable enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 05:04, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I also have concerns about the sources. Lacks secondary sources. I wouldn’t use Times of India for establishing notability See more at WP:TOI.defcon5 (talk) 15:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As a TV hosts subject meets WP:ENT. Criterion #1 is not about having significant sources. It states "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." (BTW, source #1 from Youtube is dead, I tried to remove it, but it doesn't appear in the source code. Can someone tell me how this is inserted in my talk page? appears to be some kind of infobox module.) Peter303x (talk) 00:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply No reliable sources to meet WP:GNG. Only primary sources found. Can you find any three sources that meet WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV? --Agnihothri Sharath (talk) 11:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agnihothri Sharath (talk) 11:54, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep appears to be ample sourcing provided by the anonymous editor above. I disagree with the sweeping statement that all of them fail GNG, what makes them non independent? They look okay to me. NemesisAT (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reply most of the sources are from Times of India, which does not meet GNG and WP:N. See this too. --Agnihothri Sharath (talk) 04:00, 25 September 2021 (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.