Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reema Debnath
- 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 no consensus. slakr\ talk / 03:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
- Reema Debnath (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not meet wiki notability criteria, majot inter wiki links given as references Shrikanthv (talk) 09:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Weak keep - as weakly meeting WP:BASIC per:Comment - Some sources:
- Changed my !vote to a comment for the time being; I may change it again if more sources are found. NorthAmerica1000 23:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- My humble request, please do not delete "Reema Debnath". The sources "The Shillong Times" and "Mumbai Mirror" are major news publication houses in India. And, "Reema Debnath" is the first Actress from Tripura, Northeast part of India. Your support could help her to bring her ignored state in little focus. Please have your kind thoughts for people from Northeastern part of India. Thank you... (talk) 20:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC) — debnathmallika (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Shillong Times isn't a "major news publication house", it's a small-circulation publication. And Mumbai Mirror doesn't give her coverage as an actress. Furthermore, you don't seem to understand that Wikipedia is not a publicity medium. Wikipedia is not the place to give "your support" to an up-and-coming actress. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Weak keep: Per Northamerica1000' sources. Good find. WP:BASIC Tito☸Dutta 15:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete: The Mumbai Mirror article was written only because she was accidentally declared dead by a court. The article barely mentions her acting, using phrases such as "an aspiring actor" and "played a bit-part role in...Bodyguard". The Shillong Times article is more on point -- but that newspaper is listed as having a total circulation of 17,000 -- not exactly a national presence. --Larry (talk) 15:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:42, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:43, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Doesn't appear to meet WP:BASIC per the sources NorthAmerica found above (I agree, good finds, though). Shillong Times (we have an article on it) has the notable distinction of being northeast India's oldest English-language newspaper, but it's a small circulation, not national in scope. And the Mumbai Mirror piece has nothing to do with the subject's notability as an actress. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Difficult to say how good/notable actress she is so far as acting skills are concerned, but meets notability criteria because mainly of the background and resulting popularity/notability in her origin state (Tripura) and region (North East India). As an example, Shilong Times, which is a major English newspaper in North East India, carried the story on her. --Dwaipayan (talk) 01:35, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Keep, per Dwaipayanc. The background helps, as does the sources that're there. I don't think it's a strong case, but it strikes as enough. In addition, the grammar in the article is poor in some places. GRUcrule (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- 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.