Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akshaya Deodhar

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. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:19, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Akshaya Deodhar[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)

Borderline failure to attain WP:NACTOR. We don't see significant roles in multiple productions. The award won seems not notable enough so does not weigh her enough towards WP:GNG. ☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 15:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 15:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 17:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NACTOR, and additions made to the article, including a Critical Reception section with references that seem to help demonstrate the notability of Deodhar's work, including a large fan base. Beccaynr (talk) 04:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 21:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Beccaynr, regards for putting effort in updating the article. WP:NACTOR says significant roles in multiple notable films.... which is still not met. The artist is WP:TOOSOON. ☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 10:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It may depend on how "multiple" is interpreted, because Deodhar has been starring in a notable television show for several years, had a supporting role in a film, and roles in several plays, and WP:NACTOR accounts for all of those productions. But if notability is a borderline failure per WP:NACTOR, I also think information from the recently-added sources provides support for WP:BASIC notability, because some of the commentary relates to Deodhar's prominence in the television industry, as well as her prominent social media activities, and "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Beccaynr (talk) 03:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication that any of those stage productions is notable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Per WP:NEXIST, I found a source (Marathi.tv) that says Deodhar has also been credited as "Akshya Devdhar," and describes some of her theatre performances as 'notable,' so additional references may exist. Beccaynr (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have found and added indications to the article that the Natak Company stage productions are notable, as well as additional references to support WP:BASIC notability. Beccaynr (talk) 02:09, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to demonstrate that each of the plays she was in was notable for the plays to be considered under WP:NACTOR. Even if the theatre company is notable, notability is not inherited. Same deal with the MATA Shravan Queen Award, you added. While Maharashtra Times is a notable publication, there's no clear indication that this award they issued is notable. Additionally, since you asked me to comment here, the content you restored without consensus to do so, which notes the subject as "quite active on social media and never misses a chance to keep her fans updated" is pure fluff and doesn't belong in a biography. Every modern actor has a social media presence and maintaining that presence involves activity on social media. If that content had been written by an editor as opposed being presented as a quote, it would have been deleted as promotional, as it serves no encyclopedic purpose. Other similar content is meaningless and unencyclopedic. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Per WP:BASIC "People who meet the basic criteria may be considered notable without meeting the additional criteria below," which includes WP:NACTOR. Deodhar appears to be notable for more than WP:NACTOR, and the additional sources seem to support both WP:BASIC and WP:NACTOR. As I continued to research Deodhar, I found that in the Natak Company production Item, Deodhar is listed second in their cast list, which was already referenced in the article, and I added a source about how Item later won awards, references about the notability of the Natak Company generally, and a reference about Deodhar's prominent role in the Natak Company specifically. As to the Maharashtra Times award, I created a separate section for it in the article after I saw several sources indicating it is a well-known award for actors, and I added a source describing it as "prestigious." Based on what I have found in English-language sources, it seems likely to me, per WP:NEXIST, that other sources exist in other languages both for the Natak Company productions and the Maharashtra Times award. As to references that also support WP:BASIC, I think the recent Wikipedia Signpost/2020-12-28/Essay "Subjective Importance" helps explain why I agree that if there was no reference, it could have been deleted as promotional. However, Deodhar's social media presence appears to be notable because independent and reliable sources note how she has used social media to communicate with her fans and to showcase her experiments with modern clothing. I am not sure about the source that discusses the supportive messages Deodhar has sent during the COVID-19 pandemic, because the source is described as an "entertainment blog," but it seems to be a professional operation. Overall, this AfD began with a nom for a "borderline failure" per WP:NACTOR, so the additions per WP:BASIC and in support of WP:NACTOR are also intended to address those concerns. Beccaynr (talk) 20:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Generally when there is a confusion about which rule to select for deciding notability of a subject, WP:GNG becomes ultimate way to decide. While it is true there are lot of trivial mentions about the subject in multiple places, but we lack significant coverage about her. Also a number of sources used in the article like [1], [2], [3] are either unreliable or not reputed or both. The sources which are reputed and reliable have cursory mention about the subject thus failing to attain WP:SIGCOV. A number of references like [4], [5], [6] fail to become admissible as per WP:RS, more precisely per WP:NEWSORG. Lastly, borderline failure to WP:NACTOR is still a failure and we have in addition to that CERTAIN failure for WP:GNG too, so, the subject is not suitable for inclusion. ☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 07:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources used to fluff up the article with her social media activity do not speak about the fanbase being significant in any way, they speak about the subject's use of social media. That's not the same thing whatsoever. A significant fanbase would be like Lady Gaga's Monsters or possibly even the Malayalam film fanatics who are drawn to Mohanlal or Mammootty depending on where the filmgoers live, and we would expect there to be some description in print about this signficant fanbase. But merely having followers on social media doesn't make someone with one big TV credit automatically deserve a Wikipedia article. Further, marathikhabri.com is a blog, so that fails WP:UGC, and the TOI article, with no byline attributing it to a specific reporter, could be a press release advertising the reruns of the epic shows, for all we know. And the award Item won is meaningless in the context of determining notability if the award is not notable. There are probably a hundred thousand various award mills scattered throughout Indian entertainment that exist solely for winners to promote themselves. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete he has not had multiple significant roles in notable productions. The film role was not significant.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Sunshine1191 (talk) 16:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:02, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete as others have commented, WP:NACTOR looks for mutliple substantial roles, which isn't met here. They have won an award, but it appears to be non-notable. Most of the critical reception section is on the show and doesn't mention Deodhar (that would need cleaning up if article is kept). I think this is just slightly WP:TOOSOON and would recommend that the creator have this article copied to their userspace or draft space and continue to work. Ravensfire (talk) 14:34, 4 January 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.