Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rashaana Shah

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. Yunshui ^雲 _水 11:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rashaana Shah[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)

Not notable actress which has no indication of notability. No 3rd Party sources written about her. Hence, this discussion. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 03:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 03:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 03:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 03:41, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I see several mentions of her in a quick Google News search in English: Indian Express article about the filming of a scene in one of her movies, India TV News article that mentions her as the star of an upcoming film, Times of India article that mentions her as a key role in another film, Indiawest review that mentions her positively in a film where she has a small part, and Screendaily article where she's mentioned as the star of another upcoming film. That's just in English; I expect you could find more specific coverage of her if you search in Indic languages. -- Toughpigs (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Toughpigs, Screendaily and Indiawest are not RS. IE and TOI mentions just about her which is not enough to pass GNG standards. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 02:54, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harshil169, what's the issue with Screen Daily? It looks like an industry news site to me. Toughpigs (talk) 04:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toughpigs, it has no proper editorial process. Promotion is easily possible there. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 08:03, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harshil169, is there a place where this sort of information is listed? -- Toughpigs (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harshil169, I looked at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources and didn't see any comment on Screen Daily or Indiawest. I also looked in the archives of the Reliable Sources noticeboard and found two mentions of Screen Daily: here and here. Both are positive mentions that take it for granted that Screen Daily is a reliable source. I couldn't find any discussion of Indiawest at all. Can you show me where it's been decided that these are unreliable sources? -- Toughpigs (talk) 20:51, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Toughpigs, screendaily seems to be RS as it has editorial board. But indiawest is not. My apologies. You can read WP:NEWSORG. This person still fails GNG. Harshil ^{want to talk?} 01:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Harshil169, I don't see any mention of Indiawest in the discussions about reliable sources. I read WP:NEWSORG but I don't see anything that explains why Indiawest is or is not reliable. I'm not trying to be argumentative; I'm fairly new to deletion discussions and I want to understand how the RS decisions are determined and recorded. -- Toughpigs (talk) 01:20, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We need to see quality of posts, editorial policy of websites before takin them as RS. To pass GNG, we need coverage in multiple significant independent reliable sources. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 01:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but why are you saying that Indiawest isn't a reliable source? I don't understand what you mean by "we need to see editorial policy". Who is "we", and how is that assessed? You've said several times now that Indiawest is not RS, with no evidence. Is the problem that it's an Indian news source and therefore unfamiliar? I don't know much about the Indian news media. -- Toughpigs (talk) 01:38, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I am seeing no passage of WP:ANYBIO and the roles played by her were not significant, either. As laid out over User:Winged Blades of Godric/Indian Media (with due high-quality sources), the entertainment sections of almost all Indian dailies are PR spam and thus the coverage over IE (a RS, otherwise) and TOI (always questionable and has a specific section over my afore-linked page about its long-dubious journalism) may be discounted in entirety. The one over IndiaToday (a RS) is from PTI feed and merely name-drops her as an actress in the film and I see no clue that the film eventually materialized, at all. Discounted, as well. ScreenDaily is (literally) a PR vehicle and no question of their sources, adding to WP:N. Still, a trivial mention. (All reliable sources don't lend to notability) Indiawest is a low-tier publication targetting the immigrant population and okay-ish. ∯WBG^converse 09:14, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems like it might be WP:TOOSOON for her to have an article at this time. Missvain (talk) 08:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't think she meets the notability standards for an actress. Dflaw4 (talk) 17:58, 13 January 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.