Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anveshi Jain (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 delete. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anveshi Jain[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)

This article has been through AfD before. The previous discussion concluded that the subject is not notable, nothing has changed since then. Still fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. My opinion is still that it should be deleted. Coderzombie (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Many sources, but none reliable for Wikipedia. It is promotion. Interested people should add to her IMDB page. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I did initially close this as speedied by an admin, however their rationale didn't particularly add up; the article was deleted under G4 criteria, however the article was not deleted at AfD, the last entry asked it to be draftified. Also noting this draft is also up for deletion here. Thanks Nightfury 12:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Materialscientist (talk · contribs) deleted the page. I think this was unfortunate. I think the speedy deletion was not valid. This AfD should be allowed to complete with the article available. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SmokeyJoe: This has gone through multiple deletions before, that's why I agree with @Materialscientist: here. This page has been recreated by paid editors and socks. Coderzombie (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has never been an AfD consensus to “delete”. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous AfD was Draftify only because there was a possibility of improving notability, but that has not changed in a year and unlikely to change in upcoming time as well, hence I support delete. Coderzombie (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Polite request for closing admin - please investigate as to whether the G4 rationale supplied would be appropriate in this case - when I contacted Materialscientist they did acknowledge they may have made a mistake and happy for reversion, but alas I am not an admin, so cannot do such an action. I would like to also kindly ask for non-admin closers to refrain from closing, if possible, please. Nightfury 21:58, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Recreation notification - I reviewed the reasoning here and on the CSD log, and decided that recreation made sense, both as a not-strictly a deletion and also that in such a borderline case, its recreation would also aid the AfD. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not convinced by the article's sources. I even tried a bit searching about the actress. There's coverage in some reliable sources but not much which would meet the significant coverage thing. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 14:39, 3 November 2020 (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.