Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ankit Narang


 * 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. (WP:NPASR). (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 07:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Ankit Narang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability. A filmography videography, alone, is not evidence of notability, even if the sources were impeccable. Previous CSD (db-person) was rejected as "decline CSD, presence of valid sources". — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG reads "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." I can't find significant coverage, and, even if I could, I could not tell which of the "Bollywood" magazines are reliable, and which are scandal sheets.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 16:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why did you strike out filmography and instead called it a videography? While filmography is a list of films and it was indeed not the accurate word to use, the videography is not really a list of television series to make it right to use. Although videography is a process of making video, someone might call a "list of videos" as videography too. The subject is a television actor who appears in Indian soap operas and not someone who appears in maybe music videos. Also, he is not a Bollywood actor to be found in reliable/unreliable sources related to Bollywood. Have you even understood what the "claimed notability" is? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 07:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 07:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no claim of notability in the article. I still think it qualifies for a speedy db-person even if the person were notable. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 22:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:NACTOR is the claim being made here. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 05:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * For WP:NACTOR#1, I see no claim the roles are "significant", or that the television shows are "notable". I see no statement relevant to #2 or #3.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 23:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why isn't a 1200+ episodes TV show like Pavitra Rishta and 500+ episodes show like Bade Achhe Lagte Hain and 100+ episodes show like Tum Dena Saath Mera not notable? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 09:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * The number of episodes something has doesn't show how notable it is. My self-published newspaper has 6000 editions but nobody has read it. Second Quantization (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I see Tum Dena Saath Mera (Life OK) was dropped for low ratings. Second Quantization (talk) 00:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You might want to check what channels air(ed) these shows and then speak on how "number of episodes" has to do with notability. We aren't talking of YouTube Channels here. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 05:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000(talk) 06:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  ♔  00:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)




 * Weak Delete No indication of notability although the existence of Indian sources I do not have access to is possible, Second Quantization (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as WP:ENTERTAINER and also WP:NACTOR per significant coverage sources... 1 2 3 4 6 6. Babita arora  09:04, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.