Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karan Singh Chhabra

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Karan Singh Chhabra[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)

The subject fails to pass notability (WP:GNG) and the content is written in a promotional format (WP:PROMO). Hatchens (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject has some media coverage but not in detail. Doesn't pass criteria at WP:ARTIST. — GargAvinash ^talk 04:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: I presume WP:NACTOR is not being challenged by the nominator, which I think is fair given the subject's long-running roles in TV shows and other film appearances (this IMDb page is more comprehensive than the one provided in the article: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10373748/?ref_=tt_cl_t7). In regard to WP:GNG, there is coverage—but the question is whether it meets both WP:RS and WP:SIGCOV. Here are some sources:

→https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/archive/lifestyle/script-of-a-lifetime-789394 – The source is The Tribune, for which I haven't been able to find a consensus as to reliability, although I haven't found any claims that it is unreliable, either; and the coverage goes beyond what I would consider to be trivial.

→https://www.ibtimes.co.in/raabta-movie-review-ratings-by-audience-live-updates-sushant-singh-rajput-kriti-sanon-director-730009 – The source is International Business Times, which has an average rating in terms of reliability, and the coverage here is just some very brief praise.

→https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/karan-singh-chhabra-shoots-for-half-girlfriend-on-ye-hai-mohabbatein-set/articleshow/58772055.cms – This is an article dedicated to the subject—however, the source is The Times of India, which, following the recently consensus, is a source we have to be wary of.

There are several other Times of India write-ups, too, as well as The Indian Express and The New Indian Express articles which provide mentions. Given that I believe there to be a good WP:NACTOR case, I think that the average WP:GNG case is enough for a "Weak Keep". Dflaw4 (talk) 13:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete coverage, being in the vein of passing mentions and WP:MILL, is insufficient to pass the basic requirements of either NACTOR or ANYBIO. ——Serial^# 14:16, 26 May 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.