Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annwesha Hazra


 * 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. ✗ plicit  11:58, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Annwesha Hazra

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Created by a paid editor who managed to sneak it into article space. There are what look like five good sources from the TimesofIndia.com, but every one of them has the byline "By - TIMESOFINDIA.COM". I suspect that is just press release republishing and that this is a notability fail. At the bottom of those sources in very fine print you will find "ETimes is an Entertainment, TV & Lifestyle industry's promotional website and carries advertorials and native advertising." --- Possibly (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. --- Possibly (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete the subject should be deleted as the editor of the article is doing paid work as he/she has disclosed the matter(see here . So the article should be deleted. If we give priority to paid editor, then rest paid editor will edit and they will also disclose that they are paid for this. And thus it will be problem for them who edit effortlessly on wikipedia. Bengal Boy (talk) 08:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Paid editing does not play into the notability arguments that are used here. I perhaps should have left it out of the nomination, as it does not really matter other than to let us know the intent of the article was promotion. You'll be more effective here if you address the things that do matter at AfD: sources and her notability.--- Possibly (talk) 09:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes I know I'll be more effective for this. But what should we do who contribute on wikipedia effortlessly and who contribute wikipedia without any profit. We will demotivate if higher authority will give priority to paid editors. Bengal Boy (talk) 09:12, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:07, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

So then from where would I get 'relevant' sources. And I also have to create a page, since I have already taken money from her. So stop all this fuss. You very well know that there are no sources other than those I provided, on Google. Now are you telling me search the Dark Web!!!!!!!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Mynameisparitoshmandal 14:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE per this.--- Possibly (talk) 00:42, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A paid for page stood up on paid for editorial. Google the first line of the release in the first source and you'll get all the mirrors that also ran the same stuff. Fails WP:GNG. I too must talk to an administrator about your strange behaviour. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete – the current sources are not sufficient for WP:GNG, and I can't find any other sources that would support notability claims. WP:NACTOR is also not met. --bonadea contributions talk 13:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - I've had a good look round, but all I can find in reliable sources is a few bit parts. I would have suggested a redirect, but I can't obviously find a article on a prominent film / TV show to redirect to. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  13:12, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - I really don't understand what wrong with these guys. These are the only sources in Google, for Annwesha Hazra. Now many people will say that the page musn't be created. But what about the money I have taken from her. I would never be able to make her understand all these rubish. And some are saying that I am advertising her. I really don't find a single word in that page which states it is an advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynameisparitoshmandal (talk • contribs) 10:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)  WP:SOCKSTRIKE per this.--- Possibly (talk) 00:00, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , my suggestion is that you return the money. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am lost in a transcendent state somewhere between admiration and awe. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per the bigger brains bundled before me; and can someone bollock Mynameisparitoshmandal for a) WP:PAID and b) general bizarrity in this discussion. ——  Serial  14:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - even without the UPE issue, does not meet WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 04:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Paid advertorials are not reliable sources. Cullen<sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  05:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - What I'm pulling up from Google is, based on the summaries, either name-drops or scandal-rag trash (string: "annwesha hazra"). Nothing that would help for notability. This being a product of mercenary work is yet more reason to delete it. Let this be a lesson to you, - don't offer to do a job you haven't the faintest idea how to even do.  —<i style="color: #1E90FF;">A little blue Bori</i>  v^_^v  Jéské Couriano 12:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The paid thing is what it is, but she's had the main role in two notable television shows - Chuni Panna and Ei Poth Jodi Na Sesh Hoy, so she meets WP:NACTOR. The English sources are mostly rubbish, but there may be better material in Bangla. Furius (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom, non-notable, sources not sufficient. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:26, 25 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.