Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kabeer Khurana

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kabeer Khurana[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 WP:BIO. Thsi is WP:ADMASQ, as evidenced by WP:CITEKILL/WP:BOMBARD

Moved back to Draft previously with this edit summary: "Praxidicae moved page Kabeer Khurana to Draft:Kabeer Khurana over a redirect without leaving a redirect: as per WP:PAID" Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - An article should speak for itself, and this article does not provide any indication of what the subject is notable for.
- Maybe the author intends the subject to pass creative notability for a volume of short films, but only one of the titles, Suttabaazi, has its own article, and it and this BLP appear to be the beginning of a walled garden.
- This BLP has been moved back to draft space three times, once by User:Praxidicae and twice by User:Onel5969, and each time move back by the author without discussion. We can see that the author wants this BLP in article space. We can see that the author isn't interested in discussion.
- This article has been reference-bombed with 50 sources. The reviewers have no obligation and no plan to check 50 sources. I would ask the author to identify not less than three and not more than five sources, but the author clearly isn't interested in collaborative editing.
- Maybe the author should find a wiki that doesn't require collaborative editing.
- This is a content forum, and the author doesn't want to work on this BLP in draft space, and this article doesn't satisfy notability for article space, which leaves deletion.

Robert McClenon (talk) 15:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:GNG, also a case of UPE/COI editing, so salting would probably be a good idea given the creator's editing history. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per above. Fails GNG and NDIRECTOR. -- Ab207 (talk) 08:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. The article does not meet GNG or any other notability guideline. The fact that it was moved back to mainspace after being draftified three times by two different editors leads me to believe the editor is not interested in collaborative editing and will recreate this immediately, thus my salting suggestion. --Kbabej (talk) 20:53, 19 February 2022 (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.