Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaushik Izardar


 * 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 soft delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:04, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Kaushik Izardar

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:BLP of a film and television producer, not properly sourced as passing our notability criteria for film and television producers. As always, every producer is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it's possible to verify that he exists, and instead must be shown to pass WP:GNG on properly sourced evidence of his significance -- but this amounts to "he exists", and is referenced almost entirely to glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage of other things (most commonly as a provider of soundbite in sources that read like press releases from his own employers) rather than reliable source coverage which represents other people writing about him as a subject, and the only source that offers anything more than a brief glance off his existence is a Q&A interview in which he's talking about himself in the first person. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be the subject of third party coverage and analysis. Bearcat (talk) 01:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  02:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Bearcat (talk) 01:42, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * DeleteThe reliability of the majority of sources is dubious, lacking proper oversight from their staff or editors. Some sources merely consist of namechecks or interviews. Furthermore, the produced shows by the individual in question did not appear to possess the level of notability required.AmusingWeasel (talk) 12:43, 22 June 2023 (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.