Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esha Noor

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. MBisanz ^talk 14:47, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Esha Noor[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)

fails to meet basic GNG as well relevant WP:NACTOR. cited sources are not reliable enough. I don't see she has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. Saqib (talk) 08:33, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article is alright i did add the sources to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeauSuzanne (talk • contribs)

Sourced are not reliable. --Saqib (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hip and trendinginsocial are reliable sources i remember that various actors articles also have these sources in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeauSuzanne (talk • contribs)

No. They're not RS. --Saqib (talk) 10:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then can you tell me which are reliable sources i mean everyone seems to use the one's i added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeauSuzanne (talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Does not meet guidelines. It is critical that we follow strict sourcing and conservatively follow guidelines regarding BLPs. // Timothy :: talk 07:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unreliable sources. Can't find any significant coverage. - hako9 (talk) 23:47, 29 September 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.