Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prajesh Sen (2nd nomination)

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 kept. bd2412 T 03:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prajesh Sen

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

This subject does not meet WP:BASIC or WP:FILMMAKER. Source searches are only providing passing mentions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^{(c · m)}}} 21:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep – From this Google News search I found some significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject with no false positives. My results are shown below:

Manorama's Travails of an implicated Scientist: Review of the autobiography of Nambi Narayana – A reliable source, but not quite significant coverage though, but I will still count it barely towards notability.
The Times of India's Mollywood renews its love for biopics, wherein there is 2 and a half paragraphs about Sen. This is the main source towards establishing inclusion.
Other sources exist as well, which together push him over towards notability.

Indian editors can help to find sources but even the sources that I have posted are in my opinion enough. I was considering erring on the side of caution as this is a biography of a living person and he may meet TOOSOON but there are probably sources out there that are hard to access and often need custom searches or perhaps there is more stuff in print only (unlikely in my opinion). I'm unsure why all the sources I have found are post-September; maybe it's a problem with my search. I don't think the sources are quite passing mention in response to NA1000's statement.

In conclusion, yes he fails WP:DIRECTOR but he does pass the general notability guideline and thus whether he passes WP:CREATIVE or not is moot. Also, he may pass WP:JOURNALIST (same as CREATIVE, DIRECTOR, and FILMMAKER) under criterion 4c: The person's work (or works) has [sic] won significant critical attention due to his numerous awards for journalism (let's hope they're not made up). J 947 ^{^{^{(c · m)}}} 22:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- WP:TOOSOON; the coverage is in passing, not meeting WP:SIGCOV. I don't think that the sources above are sufficient. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:15, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
'Weak Keep per J947. The coverage is weak and directing a single film doesn't meet any SNG, but I believe GNG is met. I have no ability to tell if there are Malayalam articles. My biggest concern is the title; is it "G Prajesh Sen" or "Prajesh Sen" or "Prajeshsen"? power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be G Prajesh Sen from my searches, and it definitely confused me but I think they are the same. Also, his role as a journalist seems to be the main source of coverage. J 947 ^{^{(contribs · mail)}} 22:27, 4 January 2018 (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.