Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elahe Hiptoola

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 keep. Non-admin closure. (non-admin closure) DARTH PANDA ^duel 20:34, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elahe Hiptoola[edit]

Empty biography of a Bollywood actress: a name listing, followed by a list of spotty references. A speedy candidate, really. CalendarWatcher (talk) 01:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: if an article doesn't even attempt to claim notability--if the writer can't even be arsed to add ONE SENTENCE in doing so, there's no point in having it. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 02:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems legitimate enough for me. Not much in the article, but what a cool name! Has had a role in producing, directing and acting in a respectable number of films. Am I way off base?ChildofMidnight (talk) 10:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. You want to delete it because it's too short? Wouldn't it save everyone's time if you expanded it instead? Juzhong (talk) 12:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as it doesn't make the slightest claim for any other than existence. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 02:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look closely, I think you will find that it claims she produces Bollywood films. Juzhong (talk) 02:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sure, it's a spout of an article, but the notability is there. - chicgeek ^talk 19:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What notability would that be? --CalendarWatcher (talk) 02:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Childofmidnight already said why the person is notable. Schuym1 (talk) 02:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Juzhong (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: passes WP:CREATIVE and WP:ENTERTAINER. Schuym1 (talk) 01:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In what way? There's not the slightest claim of anything other than existence. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 02:07, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked at the links in the article. Schuym1 (talk) 02:10, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't care that the content isn't in the article. Notability is shown in reliable sources and that is enough for me. Schuym1 (talk) 02:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Tons of RS to support notability based on WP:CREATIVE and WP:ENTERTAINER. Stub articles are welcome. Gangtok started as a stub. Don't fault the editor for not creating a "featured-article" worthy article. It's not a valid WP:DEL criteria. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:14, 14 November 2008 (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.