Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Gilani

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:19, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Gilani[edit]

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

Was deprodded after the addition of several non-rs sources. Does not appear to pass either WP:FILMMAKER, and searches did not turn up enough to show that they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Subject lacks notability and coverage in reliable sources. Also, as the nominator pointed out, the page's current references are poor. Meatsgains (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There's hardly 1 single CCS here, and when you take the time to translate the Arabic language sources, they are all SPSs and NRSs. Fails [[WP:GNG]]/[[WP:BASIC]], delete per policy. — Sam Sailor 19:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC) (Amended. — Sam Sailor 07:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]

The sources are in Farsi, not Arabic. --bonadea contributions talk 07:58, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — Sam Sailor 19:06, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable film theorist.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Non-notable WP:FILMMAKER.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 20:58, 24 February 2017 (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.