Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parth Dave

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 03:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Parth Dave[edit]

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

No significant coverage of the actor, with no reliable sources even. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 05:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 09:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 09:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 09:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as he only has background characters such as playing so and so's son, and there's nothing better for WP:ENTERTAINER. SwisterTwister talk 04:34, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comment: ALL actors, even some of today's most notable, begin with minor roles... and reliable sources confirming his career are available, though sadly not used... so to disagree with the above, through an incomplete IMDB and searches through WP:INDAFD giving us ("Parth Dave" "Master Parth Dave", it appears that he has had enough significant roles since 2003 to meet WP:NACTOR. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 00:22, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry MichaelQSchmidt this is not about the roles he played, this is about whether the subject meets the Notability criteria. Secondly, please do not say again about its roles he played without independent sources. Does it has any kind of coverages in media? If yes then say. Third point we are not promotional agency so do not implement it even mate. Thanks. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 06:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in a lack of individual's coverage notability criteria tell us a discussion then has to be about the roles, and so anyone simply and unfoundedly claiming his roles are unsourcable or insignificant is unhelpful. We do not cherry-pick which guide to understand, but what I do understand after seven years and 60,000 edits is that the inclusion guide WP:NACTOR requires verification of an actor's roles, without demanding SIGCOV of the individual. Those two guides are not set as mutually exclusionary. No evidence beyond supposition that author User:Parthactor is the likely subject, but the user has not edited the stub since November 2010... but it has been edited by many others have since he stopped editing Wikipedia. And while ADVERT/PROMOTION in any article would certainly apply if the article were itself somehow full of unsourcable fluff, rather than sourcable fact, I know you decided to ignore a a reasonable assertion of notability when you wished it speedied. Atlantic306 was correct to decline your requested speedy. Had you given any thought to simply tagging it for sources rather than bringing it to AFD? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 21:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as had prominent roles in feature films, there are plenty of reviews such as [1], and [2], I haven't found anything biographical yet. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vipinhari || talk 17:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - sorry, I'm not seeing the significant roles in notable films. It only took about 8 minutes to look at all 12 roles, and the only one which even approaches the level of significance is that in Blackmail. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:17, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I would have to agree with Onel5969 here. He does not have significant roles in most of the notable films (except for 1 or at most 2) he's acted, fails WP:NACTOR. Doesn't meet WP:GNG—UY Scuti ^Talk 19:40, 7 April 2016 (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.