Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armeena Khan


 * 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. This debate has been marred by some sockpupetting and lots of irrelevant comments. I was ready to close this as delete, but then came to the comments from SpinningSpark. I recommend that the sources unearthed be added to the article as soon as possible to show notability. No prejudice against a re-nomination of this article after 1 or 2 months. Randykitty (talk) 03:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Armeena Khan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PR puffery trying to create notability for an utterly non-notable "actress and model". The article has obviously been created by a PR agent, and was full of fake/bogus references before other editors started cleaning it up, leaving only a single reference even mentioning her, an article that has nothing to do with her being an actress or model, only a run-of-the-mill "fashion designer". Or to sum it up: the article not only fails WP:NACTOR but also falls short of passing WP:GNG by a country mile. Thomas.W talk 18:39, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  18:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  18:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment I am one of the original editors of this article. I came it across in through google search. I am not her PR agent or any such like. Your assumption is misdirected. At best the article needs improving and at worst it is subjective in its written form in places and needs to be referenced. But so are many other articles on here but they evolve over time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlinsage10 (talk • contribs) 10:14, 31 October 2014 (UTC)  — Merlinsage10 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 *  Comment Delete As it is in its current state, it fails to adequately establish notability. The only Google News article I could find is this, which is a passing mention that she's going to be in a TV film. I don't find anything significant at Google Books. There are some interviews but those are WP:PRIMARY.  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Changed position from Comment to Delete. I don't see that there has been any progress in establishing her notability. Further, I'm getting the sense that there is a coordinated attempt to retain the article, which makes me suspect paid editors and thus an agenda to promote the subject. The argument found below from Merlinsage, "I got over half a million results from google just from her first name" is laughable. And there are numerous other Bollywood actors all around Wikipedia. Claims that there isn't a lot of coverage of Khan because of censorship is absurd. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:NACTOR requires "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", and WP:GNG requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable third party sources", so a passing mention in a single article doesn't help. Thomas.W talk 19:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Doesn't make a credible claim of notability under any of our subject-specific inclusion rules, and doesn't cite nearly enough (or any at all, really) reliable sourcing to get over WP:GNG instead. In fact, I would frankly have considered this outright speediable, as either "advertising" or "no explanation of significance", had I seen it before the nominator did. Bearcat (talk) 20:18, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * AfD-discussions are archived, while there's no record of speedies other than under what criteria it was deleted, in my experience re-creations are also easier to get rid of if the article has been deleted at AfD (CSD G4). Thomas.W talk 20:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Cannes: http://simplybhangra.com/news/latest-updates/6525-she-cannes-she-has-armeena-khan-writhes-into-


 * KEEP.
 * I am not sure what you guys searched but I got over half a million results from google just from her first name. This stuff is pretty note worthy if you are a user in South Asia or Middle East.

cannes.html#.VFNZEkvaNuY
 * Bollywood:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_F14gHZwNY
 * Lollywood:http://galaxylollywood.wordpress.com/2014/07/20/yalgaar-to-bring-swat-operation-in-light/
 * http://www.tv.com.pk/celebrity/Armeena-Rana-Khan/319/biography
 * Next film: http://www.dawn.com/news/1125718
 * Next film after that: http://reviewit.pk/farhat-ishtiaqs-bin-roye-aansu-coming-soon-on-hum-tv/
 * Her clothing line: http://www.fashionsrunway.com/armeena-rana-khan-designer-lawn-collection-2014-gohar-textile-mills/
 * More clothing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8hrEsxId9g


 * Unfortunately wikipedia is western-centric and currently most of the editors are seemingly based in N. America and Europe. I read lots of "notable persons" on wikipedia who I and most people have never heard of. Hopefully this situation will improve. Merlinsage10 talk 10:07, 31 October 2014 (GMT) — Merlinsage10 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * So you got half a million results when doing a Google search on "Armeena"? Nice, but it only proves that there are a lot of people named Armeena. If I do a search on my first name, "Thomas", I get 1.6 million results. So can I have an article, please? On a more serious note, the first link is about a thoroughly non-notable short film, and thus doesn't count (see my comment above about what is required per WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG), the fourth link has Armeena Khan as one of several people in a picture, but doesn't even mention her name in the text of the article, providing no connection between her and the film the article is about, so that doesn't count either; the second to last link is already in the article, and has been mentioned further up in this discussion, and the rest are blogs, Youtube-links etc that are not reliable sources, and can't be used as references on Wikipedia. Leaving nothing. Thomas.W talk 10:50, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes you can have an article. I will do one for you with some choice words. Seriously though, there is a bit of an issue here. I understand where you are coming from but the way the media works out there is different. There is heavy censorship, especially with the problems of religious fanatics etc. So youtube is banned and wikipedia is not widely known. But Facebook is used heavily - so we know that she is in this film and if I ask someone from that part of the world who watches cinema and film about her then I will get a difference answer than I would from someone in Canada (ironically no one knows her there). This is the official FB page of the film https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/yalghaar so I know she is starring in it opposite the lead male. Now looking at Mila Kunis' page for example I see future projects are cited yet future projects are an issue with the page I am editing. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlinsage10 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, if you read WP:GNG you will find there is no pass allowed for "places where the media 'works differently'". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  19:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * YouTube videos and Facebook posts and WordPress blogs do not constitute reliable sourcing for a Wikipedia article under any circumstances — mainstream media censorship doesn't have any bearing on that, as nothing in this article suggests any reason why this person would have been singled out as a victim of that. And they still wouldn't count as sufficient sourcing even if it did — for example, even if she were actually being targeted for government censorship in that way, that wouldn't prevent international sources such as the BBC or The New York Times from reporting on that censorship as a story in and of itself.
 * Also, just for the record, notability has nothing to do with what you have or haven't heard of. I've heard of lots of people who don't qualify for Wikipedia articles (e.g. friends, family, the constituency assistant to my MP, the band that plays my local pub on Saturday nights, etc.), and am wholly unfamiliar with many people who do (I couldn't personally name even one current member of the German Bundestag if I tried, for example, but that doesn't make them not notable). Notability is a factor of reliable source coverage, not of anybody getting an automatic entitlement to a Wikipedia article just because it's possible to prove that they exist. Bearcat (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TOOSOON unless some sources are found. --Sammy1339 (talk) 16:24, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. After a second look, I may have acted too hastily. These sources (already mentioned) are plausible:, , , . Reliability of a couple of those is arguable, but they are more than just facebook and wordpress as was implied above. --Sammy1339 (talk) 20:12, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: Sorry, I'm not seeing it. If Merlinsage10 has found reliable sources, where are they?  Why aren't they in the article?  Claiming that there's lots of censorship in South Asia is garbage: India has a huge press, and they're film-fanatic.  There should be a zillion English-language sources: if this lady is the real deal.  (And if she's supposedly Canadian-born and works out of the UK, what censorship?)  Sorry, show me some good reliable sources first. Nha Trang 22:25, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, she is based in Dubai, not India, so the censorship claim is plausible. Nevertheless I don't think we ought to write articles solely based on Facebook and similar media. --Sammy1339 (talk) 03:09, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The article claims she's based in Dubai, but according to IMDB, her works are in Hindi, for the most part, and this Hum TV mentioned now in the article is in Pakistan, and she seems to be ethnic Pakistani. You kinda think that the Emirates aren't where her oeuvre is being marketed. Nha Trang 19:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * delete Upon searching I don't find much details about this model/actress not much popular or notable - Krutim 11:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)




 * KEEP.
 * Hey! reading through these discussions I’m a little perturbed by the number of commentators from the western world discrediting Armeena as just a ‘fashion designer’??!!! – but have no knowledge of South Asian cinema.

I’ve personally watched several of her films, and if Wikipedia has any form of credibility then it should take control of allowing certain commentators who specialise in certain areas of knowledge access to accept or delete articles on a particular subject.
 * Please can we have commentators who specialise in Bollywood/Lollywood determine the fate of this article.

Armeena is an up and coming actress who’s played star roles in many films already as well as major roles on other shows, and serials. This actress is also becoming very popular in the British Asian scene. Please retain this article. The whole world doesn’t revolve around western cinema or Hollywood alone; there are actors in Bollywood who command fan base multitudes greater than the most famous of Hollywood actors. Yes my dear American/European commentators – there is a greater world out there beyond your shores, and Wikipedia is meant to be a world encyclopedia!
 * I have to admit I'm starting to get a bit annoyed with Wikipedia these days, really there needs to be more control on the controllers. You often find there isn't enough detailed information on actors/actresses from other cultures, as they are 'foreign' and therefore irrelevant it seems. Then how do you expect people to fund and contribute to such a biased encyclopedia.
 * Also someone above mentions, in this particular case that they found 'nothing' on Google about Armeena? - Can they even use a search engine? I just typed 'Armeena Khan' and can see several photos of her and various links to her interviews, and movie clips.
 * If you're not qualified on the subject, you have no authority on its existence.

EddyJawed(talk) 11:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC) 
 * Comment: That's not how Wikipedia works, guy. You don't need to know squat about a subject to decide whether or not it's covered at significant length in reliable, independent, third-party sources.  If I see feature articles about her in major newspapers, then she passes the GNG, whether I know jack about Bollywood or not.  If you can't (or won't) demonstrate that those sources exist, then she fails the GNG, whether I know jack about Bollywood or not.  I mentioned it uptopic that South Asia is swarming with print and Internet media, and they all love Bollywood: the Times of India has the largest circulation of any English-language daily in the world, and India alone has 12 other papers in the world's top 25.  If this gal is as important to South Asian cinema as all of that---where are the sources? Nha Trang 20:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't think his name is Guy. --Sammy1339 (talk) 20:39, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. Thank you Sammy for correcting 'Nha Tang' who thinks my name is 'Guy'...and thinks Armeena is 'this gal'. I don't know where you have been looking but there are numerous sections of her periodically appearing on bollywood magazines. I'm sure I've actually found her on Stardust. I'll come back to you later with a link to a mag that's online. I'm Eddy by the way. EddyJawed(talk) 20:56, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete fails our standards for verifiability through reliable published sources at this time. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * delete too soon, no significant coverage in reliably published sources. the only reliable source in the bunch above is Dawn - and in there her name appears in a photo caption, but she is not even mentioned in the text as a participant in the film. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  20:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep (double vote struck) Link to magazine, she's on front cover... EddyJawed(talk) 22:54, 7 November 2014 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.101.93 (talk)
 * Thanks to Eddy for that. This should be an easy keep now. --Sammy1339 (talk) 23:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Not quite. A front cover wouldn't necessarily establish notability any more than any other passing mention would. If there is an article about her, that would be a different story. But simply being mentioned by a magazine, or appearing in a photo, does not qualify as "significant coverage". And the fact that it is an interview, makes it a primary source anyway, not the "reliable secondary sources" we expect. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * And presuming this Ink Magazine is a reliable source, and presuming the "exclusive" inside talks about the subject in "significant detail"---and presuming there are multiples of these sources. Anyone got a link to that ARTICLE, not to the photo?  Got to admit that Ink Magazine not having a Wikipedia article isn't a great sign. Nha Trang 19:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The magazine is the magazine of the radio station City FM 89 which does have a Wikipedia article and (despite its atrociously promotional article) does appear to be a significant broadcaster, part of the Dawn Media Group. I think we can safely imply that there is some editorial control, and the articles are not user submitted. SpinningSpark 01:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - I have just found a whole bunch of references which I will upload in the next couple of days. Kikboy (talk) 19:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC) — Kikboy (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment: I wonder if there's a family gathering here. The comment above was made by an IP, and then signed by a brand new user account, the only edit made by either of them. One of Eddy Jawed's two KEEP !votes was also made by an IP, and signed by Eddy Jawed, with both Eddy and that IP also being single-purpose users, interested only in Armeena Khan and this AfD. And on top of that both IPs geolocate to Manchester, UK, Armeena Khan's home town... Thomas.W talk 19:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * , you should upload them ASAP, not in a couple of days, since the AfD process isn't going to wait for you.  Thomas, I too detect fishiness from the SPA. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah ... the guy's pulling a fast one here. If it smells like fish, it's probably a fish. Nha Trang 21:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. OK I'm getting fed up of this. I only got to this page the other day, when in Manchester at my parents house in Crumpsall, which uses the Victoria Park internet exchange (so I hope you wannabe Sherlock's, you know who, deduced that one). I was commenting on her with my family, as we saw her on an Asian television channel in an interview. I then went to this page to find out about her, and noticed the deletion tag. I do not know her personally or her family, and am not in any way affiliated to her so am extremely angry about this false accusation.
 * I'm absolutely fed up, especially when searching for significant celebrities of the South Asian community, getting told by Wikipedians whose name I can't even pronounce properly determining their opinions of a celebrities level of popularity. Sure, deleting her really doesn't bother me. However it just reaffirms my belief that Wikipedia is culturally biased encyclopaedia and therefore impartial probably on many other elements of current affairs and thus holds little value. Why should I financially donate a contribution to keep this site running sponsor free when its so biased because its not correctly regulated?
 * There's other notable celebs that I keep seeing with deletion tags, such as ZaidAliT - another Canadian South Asian comedian whose made a massive following through making home made videos.
 * In Armeena's case that very interview, plus dozens of commercials and other interviews, movie trails can be spotted all over youtube and dedicated Bollywood film sites. There's also a large audience and fanbase for Bollywood even here in the west from Asians and non Asians alike, and i feel those who know about Bollywood should determine the existence of articles like these.
 * As for my location, have a look at my IP today. I am in Durham which is 120 miles away from Manchester where I live and work everyday. You can ring my workplace if you like or meet me every week at the local MMA gym for a good sparring session? Get the full evidence first, then make accusations. My parents living in Manchester, and her being from there is pure coincidence - Greater Manchester is a very large region of England, soon to have its own mayor!
 * EddyJawed(talk) 22:06, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As previously pointed out, there are numerous articles related to Bollwood at the English Wikipedia as well as numerous articles related to various cultures. This is not a popularity issue, this is entirely a notability issue, and the relevant guidelines are WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. If the contributors, or you, can establish that the subject meets either the criteria at GNG or NACTOR, then you should talk about that, not about bias and MMA gyms, as none of that stuff will help to bring the article up to standards. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:10, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

For her TV career there is;
 * Keep. The transparent redlink sockpuppetry (or at least offsite canvassing) had me all set to call for delete on this one (Merlinsage10, do you really expect us to believe that you randomly found this article in a Google search less than two hours after it was created?).  However, after actually looking for sources, I am finding so much coverage that this just has to be a keep.  I will list some of them in a moment after sorting through them. SpinningSpark 11:14, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Biography, tv.com.pk
 * Armeena Rana Khan – The New Sensation! Reviewit.pk

For her fashion career, there really is a LOT of coverage. This is just a small selection. I haven't checked these sites carefully for reliability, but there is just so much coverage that she just has to be notable for this at least;


 * Pakistani Model Armeena Rana Khan, Fashion Elan
 * Armeena Rana Khan shares her Personal & Professional Life Stories (Interview) Viewscraze.com
 * Pakistani Model Armeena Rana Khan Biography Fashion Universe
 * Armeena Rana Khan Fashion Maza

For her film career, notability is a bit more dubious, but she does get some coverage in the Times of India, a lack of which was exercising some commentators. Sorry, some of these articles are probably available online, but I found them through InfoTrac which requires registration so I can't give a link.

Three articles in the Times about Pushkar Jog's film give some coverage to her as the co-star;
 * "Huff! It's Too Much: A candyfloss romance with a real touch", Times of India 8 November 2013
 * "Pushkar locks lips with Brit model", Times of India, 6 November 2013
 * "Marathi actor Pushkar Jog marks his B-Town debut", Times of India, 28 October 2013

Another Times article gives her some coverage prior to release of the film (she is the cause of the delay which the article is about) and is named as the star;
 * "Pushkar Jog's film delayed over a year", Times of India, 24 July 2013

She is also named as the star in
 * "Every film has its own fate", DNA (Daily News & Analysis), 24 October 2013

And finally, another article found on Infotrac, but about her fashion career rather than film, Spinning<b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 12:03, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "Armeena Khan collaborates with Gohar textile mills for spring and summer collection", Regional Times (Karachi), 8 March 2014.

Comments I have no horse in this but just wanted to add that some of above news articles that are mentioned by Spinning are available online:
 * Candyfloss: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Huff-Its-Too-Much-A-candyfloss-romance-with-a-real-touch/articleshow/25383114.cms,
 * Brit model: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/Marathi-actor-Pushkar-Jog-marks-his-B-Town-debut/articleshow/24776975.cms
 * B-Town debut: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/marathi/movies/news/Pushkar-locks-lips-with-Brit-model/articleshow/25260822.cms
 * Delayed: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/marathi/movies/news/Pushkar-Jogs-film-delayed-over-a-year/articleshow/21276032.cms.
 * DNA article is available here: http://dnasyndication.com/dna/City-Pune/dna_english_news_and_features/Every-film-has-its-own-fate/DNPUN63568.
 * Here's another article I was available to find from the Lahore Times which does have a wiki on here. http://www.lhrtimes.com/2013/03/05/armeena-khan-in-pakistans-happily-married-151728/
 * I think the Mills article was a press release as I found a similarly named article here: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/03/06/business/armeena-khan-collaborates-with-gohar-textile-mills-for-springsummer-collection/ where it is categorised as a press release.
 * Hope this helps whichever way this Afd goes. Cowlibob (talk) 00:35, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm still having difficulty seeing the "significant coverage from reliable independent secondary sources" aspect of the GNG being met. Of the sources I've seen, including the ones just added above by Cowlibob, most seem to be brief interview pieces, which aren't exactly "significant coverage" and are probably considered primary sources anyway. Press releases are primary sources. Spinning, help me see the light. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:58, 20 November 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.