Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yol Pranvarin

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 no consensus. Sandstein 11:15, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yol Pranvarin[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)

BLP of a Thai actress with no demonstrated reliable source coverage - was tagged with WP:BLPPROD shortly after creation in 2017 and was saved by the addition of one very flaky gossip-site source which doesn't verify any of the facts in the article. There may be Thai-language sources, but the Thai Wikipedia page on her, while longer, is also unreferenced and tagged for notability so I can't find anything useful there.

At this point it appears to fail WP:N and remains an effectively unsourced BLP. ~ mazca ^talk 23:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ~ mazca ^talk 23:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. ~ mazca ^talk 23:03, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Khaosod is not flaky gossip-site. The linked article for Khaosod newspaper cite 950,000 daily circulation which is among top newspapers in Thailand. This article [1] shows that Thai Post (ไทยโพสต์), Khaosod (ข่าวสด), Matichon (มติชน) all have 950,000 daily circulation in 2018-2019. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 06:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unfamiliar with the area so I'm happy to accept that it's a major publication; but by my Google-translate-assisted reading of the article it's an almost completely contentless fluff piece of wedding pictures. It might be a decent newspaper, but that linked article doesn't seem worthy of one, and certainly isn't coverage that really helps source an encyclopedia article. ~ mazca ^talk 18:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Lerdsuwa's comment about the cited source notwithstanding, I'm not really seeing in-depth coverage about the subject herself. News searches turn up mostly routine celebrity news covering e.g. her wedding, etc. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 23:12, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 23:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Her filmography is not insubstantial, and there's recent coverage (including Thairath piece printed since my previous comment).[2][3] --Paul_012 (talk) 17:13, 19 September 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.