Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kriti Verma


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:06, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Kriti Verma

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable game show contestant who has received virtually no in depth coverage and is sourced almost entirely to the equivalent of rag mags and gossip sites. Praxidicae (talk) 17:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:40, 10 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I accepted the draft so I won't vote, but I'd like to say she's there's at least on RS solely about her and mentions in other RS as well. L293D (☎ • ✎) 18:43, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I often question your judgement at AFC but your response here makes me think I am correct in doing so. The source you've linked is literally nothing more than a gossip piece. Do you really expect an RS that is subject to actual meaningful oversight to title something Biography, unknown facts, photos and videos of ex-Roadies contestant?! And in this case, the paper itself may be most of the time, but not everything it publishes is. Praxidicae (talk) 19:04, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Also in what universe are passing mentions anywhere in depth coverage? And certainly, those mentions in RS are not included in this iteration of the article.Praxidicae (talk) 19:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , whilst L293D is correct in saying that India Today is generally a reliable source, especially its magazine stuff, vide:, , , , and , its online-only content, in specific, its entertainment-related reports are—much akin to most other Indian newspapers and magazines—less than stellar. Hence, I think, considering context matters, the link mentioned by L293D shouldn't be treated as a reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SshibumXZ (talk • contribs) 15:50, 11 October 2018 (UTC); edited 18:04, 11 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I think this article should be deleted, as subject of this article does not really fulfils the notability criteria, being contestant of some reality show is not enough. If we accept this then as a corollary we are saying that every contestant of such shows should have a page for them? Which sounds weird to me! in short "only being an contestant is not enough". Its my first attempt to participate in such discussions but I expressed what I gathered from my knowledge of policies here, I would love to read what others have to say on this. Sureshkhole (talk) 23:11, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete-Gossip style coverage, entirely centered around her participation in a reality-show.Nothing apart from same locus in regional media. &#x222F; WBG converse 14:47, 11 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete — Per my comment, the nomination and 's comment. Regards, SshibumXZ (talk · contribs). 15:51, 11 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable. So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 17:49, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:NACTOR by all the three criterias. This actor has not acted with a major role in multiple Serials or movies. the coverage is only due to the promotion of the serial. lacks independent coverage. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  21:04, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:GNG. Non-notable individual. This is far from the depth or persistence of coverage demanded by even basic compliance with WP:ANYBIO. Accesscrawl (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2018 (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.