User talk:Rush922/subpage/JanhviK

Deliberation page for the Reinstating of Janhvi Kapoor's Page (Sep 24, 2018)
Note: As the heading says, this page is meant to call for the re-Deliberation of Janhvi Kapoor's page, which was deleted as per Articles of Deletion on 24 November 2017, so as to reinstate it to a state of Validity. For those who haven't seen it yet, the User Page of this subpage is a draft I have made to submit for review:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rush922/subpage/JanhviK

The original Articles of Deletion page for Kapoor is below:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Janhvi_Kapoor

Preceding Comments
User:Amorymeltzer had also semi-protected the page itself on 15 July 2018, citing 'Persistent disruptive edits:'
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Janhvi_Kapoor&action=edit

Earlier discussions were had on the following pages, you may read them to familiarize yourself with the arguments:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:GSS#Reinvoking_a_deleted_page
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amorymeltzer#Reinstate_the_Janhvi_Kapoor_page,_please?

Relevant Policy pages:
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)  (WP:NACTOR)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Too_soon#Actors_and_actresses  (WP:NYA)/(WP:TOOSOON)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith

-

Deliberators
Reinstation Appealer: Original Page-lock Admin: Invitation to Previous Article deliberators/others:
 * User:Rush22
 * User:Patar knight

--

Discussion Space
Initial Argument by User:Rush922:

I propose that this page be reinstated for the following reasons, which are largely a summary of what I argued in the earlier links with User:Gss and User:Winged Blades of Godric:

1. Janhvi Kapoor has released her first film - meriting her own page Supporting arguments for this are: * WP:NYA states the specific example of Paris Jackson: "At the time of the discussion, she had been announced as the star of a film that would be released a year after – however, the film had not actually been released yet. If or when the film is released, and if Jackson is the star of the film, she likely will merit an article, but not until then." Godric notes that WP:NYA is just an essay, and not a heavily-vetted policy by the Wikipedia community like WP:NACTOR. Yet that is something that I, as a relative beginner, would not have noticed by comparing the two pages to each other. Both WP:NACTOR and WP:NYA look exactly the same and appear equally valid, and on the same 'heirarchy of importance' to me, a beginner. I would never have guessed that WP:NACTOR is counted more heavily than WP:NYA unless I looked to the very top of the page and found the Header-Textboxes for each page. So, for that reason, I initially followed the logic that WP:NYA has the ability to 'override' or allow exception to WP:NACTOR if common sense allows. If Wikipedia is indeed as beginner-friendly as many of their policies state (i.e. Be Bold, Good Faith, etc), then I argue that the rules printed on pages should be followed at face value, and should not need to have community-based baggage that nullifies their natural interpretation. But, just for arguments sake, I will evaluate the argument that people have previously noted in criteria 1 of WP:NACTOR, namely that an actor needs MULTIPLE acting roles and not just one. To that, I say, I can understand the reasoning behind it- because typically, ONE acting role is not by itself good enough to discern notable importance. An actor may be here today, and gone tomorrow; they typically need more than one notable film (not just a cameo or assisting credit) to prove that they are here to stay. But in some cases, again where common sense prevails, the argument can be made that even with just ONE film, an actor can prove their longevity through other means (see my other supporting arguments below). COMBINING these reasons together with even just one film, particularly in a case like Janhvi's where she is part of the illustrious Kapoor acting family and is all but guaranteed to have a future in show business, would in my mind constitute reasonable validity. 2. Janhvi has a considerable Fan following among her peers, and is an especially popular 'Star-kid' (or celebrity daughter), COMBINED with the fact that she has released her first movie. This is number 2 out of 3 for criteria of an Actor's Notability as per WP:NACTOR. On its' own, it doesn't make a strong case for notability (as Godric notes) but combined with the fact that Kapoor HAS released her first film and has already signed her second one, common sense says it makes for a very strong case. I note the usage of common sense here specifically because, although Godric earlier touted to me the importance of following WP:NACTOR, the Notability page itself has a heading which states: "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply."

3.Janhvi has won an Award - the Vogue "Fresh Face" award for Debutante Actor - and has signed as a Brand Ambassador for a Cosmetics Company, Nykaa. This also strongly advocates for the case that she is a Notable personality as per WP:NACTOR, as winning an award can constitute point 3, which is ""made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." Hear me out- I can interpret that as not necessarily meaning unique in the sense of standing out and being a pioneer - like Steve Jobs in the computer field, or Martin Scorsese in directing - but merely that a large enough audience ACCEPTED her contribution as noteworthy enough to merit an award.  Just the fact that she WON a valid award from a reputed source, even if it is Vogue, would mean that she had to beat out other potential rivals and would distinguish her as having some social importance.  Again, common sense hints that she has made a more definite mark than would otherwise suggest.

4. Her debut-film co-star, Ishaan Khatter, had his Wikipedia page created when he only had ONE notable credit to his name, and NOBODY marked it as incorrect. Looking at his page history (sorted by 'oldest'), it was created by User:HindWIKI, who also earlier deliberated on Janhvi's page's deletion and is thus invited here, in November 2017. Unless I am mistaken somehow, I see NO controvertial redactions or requests to delete due to non-notability in that history. His only film-related roles were as directors' assistant or child-star roles, NEITHER of which are noteworthy as per WP:NACTOR. At the time the page was created, his first movie, Beyond the Clouds had not even released yet - it was 3 days away. His SECOND film would not release for almost 3/4 of a year - July 2018, being also Janhvi's debut. So my issue is that, for people arguing that Janhvi cannot have a page with only ONE legitimate acting credit, HOW COME Ishaan DID indeed have such a page with nobody making a stir? There seems to be a contradiction there.