Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajeev Masand

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. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 09:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rajeev Masand[edit]

Film reporter and reviewer; he does work for a cable network, but I haven't found any articles on him per WP:BIO. Nearly all of his biography is pulled directly from Startv violating WP:COPYVIO. Mr. Vernon (talk) 02:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per above. Mspraveen (talk) 12:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - copyvio and lack of sources identifying him as notable. -xC- 13:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep! It appears that in his part of the world he does have a career outside StarTV and is notable...Times of India publishes his interview with George Lucas, one of his reviews in Naachgaana, quoted in marketplace.publicradio.org, his reviews spread through FilmiKhabar, Truveo seems to show his opinion matters to somebody, Mutiny.in speaks toward his abilities, Ongoing review series at AsianOutlook.com, et al. Use this search or this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelQSchmidt (talk • contribs) 18:36, August 21, 2008
- Sorry. I must have been signed out. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this AfD was incomplete, with the appropriate notice missing from the article itself. This has been corrected.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:09, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per MichaelQSchmidt, I think the sources do exist to show some notability for this person. A quick Google News search pulls up 26 hits. He is the film critic for a national news channel, and has at least two television series: Masand's Verdict and To Catch a Star. It does, however, suffer from being a creation of the subject or someone who knows him, leading to a serious lack of neutrality. Its been stubified, but also still needs checked, rewritten, etc. Tag for issues and give some time. I've done some of the needed clean up already. No prejudice to renominate after a month or two if significant improvements are not forth coming and sources do not pan out.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Shyambhagat

Respected Editors. I don't know what wrong with the review table of this article. If you see the articles of other Critics, you can clearly see given points and their official comments for number of films. I removed all the controversial comments and points raised by all. But now I don't think so that the unsortable review has a problem. If someone is raising any violation point, it isn't true. Because ultimately the website hosting this articles is been ultimate beneficiary. If some tell me any valid arguments on this point, I will never update this list again.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:54, 21 August 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.