Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naazuk Lochan


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Naazuk Lochan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable actor, no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject and no evidence of satisfying WP:NACTOR. GSS (talk |c|em ) 12:07, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 12:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 12:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep- Playing a non-extra significant roles in notable TV shows indicates importance/significance.--Gishaforza (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2018 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Gishaforza (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * First, you must add your own comment and explain how? secondly, you need to provide reliable sources to support that the subject has played a significant role in the TV shows listed in the article. GSS (talk |c|em ) 13:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Naazuk has played important roles in three big TRP rating TV serials- Naagin (TV series) (season2),Brahmarakshas (TV series) and now currently in Jiji Maa. In IMDB, also she is given prominent mention
 * https://www.imdb.com/name/nm9885667/
 * --Gishaforza (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * IMDb is a user generated website and is not considered a reliable source. GSS (talk |c|em ) 15:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. Only minor roles so far, and no significant coverage online in WP: Reliable sources. WP:TOOSOON at best. The Mighty Glen (talk) 03:44, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. WP:NACTOR states: Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. This person hasn't. There is therefore no validity in 's declining of the CSD. But SoWhy declines a lot of CSDs. . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If playing significant roles in multiple notable productions is sufficient for notability, shouldn't playing any non-extra role in multiple such productions be sufficient to establish significance? After all, it is a lower standard than notability and what "significant" means is oftentimes only clear after discussion. That said, I don't claim this subject is indeed notable. Just significant enough to warrant further discussion. So yeah, delete is the correct outcome since he fails all possible notability guidelines (at this time). Regards SoWhy 20:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , the key word is 'significant', but there is a similar word in German that might not have exactly the same meaning. I would understand your confusion.  There are no claims of significance in the article. I read it 6 times. It didn't take long. All I discovered is that the one sources is a malware trojan. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, "significant" and the German word "signifikant" are commonly listed as meaning the same, e.g. . There is no confusion. The standard of A7 is, despite a fraction of editors ignoring it, explicitly lower than notability and so it would be incorrect to apply notability criteria to A7. Fun fact: My decline rate is 11.5% of all speedy requests I handled (1405 declines compared to 10,746 deletions). Just saying. Regards SoWhy 07:37, 8 June 2018 (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.