Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nazaqat




 * 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 to delete. After extended time for discussion, there are several somewhat weak arguments for keeping the article, but a clear absence of consensus for deletion, and some reasonable grounds to expect that additional work can be done to improve the article. There is no reason to expect that further extending discussion here will yield further clarity. BD2412 T 06:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Nazaqat

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

aside from the TNIE review, there is nothing else significant in terms of sources about the author or the book. Du Beat is a student paper and is pretty insignificant, Zee News doesn't even have a byline and the rest are utterly unreliable. Also worth noting this book was included along with a few sources in the AFD'd Harsh Agarwal, which was also found to be non-notable PRAXIDICAE💕  21:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and India.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:NBOOKS says that book should be subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. Source 1 is by Zee News and has a byline by Aparna Mudi (journalist byline). I think nominator missed seeing it. The review is completely about book and discusses the book. Some excerpt from the book is already present in the current draft. There is so much more too. Like Good women oriented thrillers are difficult to come by, and `Nazaqat` is one of the few that has the capability to make the mark. Source 2 Metro India  written by Sankalpita Singh (journalist byline) is a full non-trivial discussion on the book. Also there is Lucknow Tribue article by Lucknow Tribune Team along with a complete article in New Indian Express taken by Svetlana Lasrado. The book is completely notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. Ts7852 (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , the mobile version brings a different name but that's a different issue. Aparna Mudi] is a lifestyle blogger and a freelance writer with a degree in fashion-design. I don't fathom how do I count her article about the book as a journalistic one. Infact, I don't personally regard any Zee News related sources as reliable. New Indian Express is a legit reliable source, and I am not making any comments right now, as I need to go through other sources as well. ─  The Aafī on Mobile   (talk)|undefined  19:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note, Aafi and sharing Aparna's profile. Addendum to what I said, I found her Linked in profile where she lists that she worked as an entertainment and lifestyle journalist at Zee from July 2013 to July 2015. The review date is July 2014. So this was written when she was employed as a journalist at Zee :) Also, many writers/bloggers/journalists freelance for different publications. Aparna seems to be writing in several other reputed publications like India Today and The Wire (India) that only makes the position of this source stronger. The content of the review is solid. I also see two discussions about the reliability of Zee News, both of them considering it reliable, .   Ts7852 (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Appears to be significant. Being covered by journalists or in house teams by a northern newspaper (Lucknow Tribune), two southern newspapers (TNIE and The Metro) and one national news organisation (Zeenews). DU Beat and Friedeye is definitely garbage and should be removed. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete TNIE is actually an interview, so it doesn't count. Even if we set aside the reliability question, Metro India is actually republished from bookgeeks, a blog which solicits books for reviews. Lucknow Tribune, again of questionable reliability, is also an interview, masked as a puff profile of the author. It only includes a blurb and makes no attempt at any sort of review. This leaves us with the single zeenews.india.com review and one review isn't enough for NBOOK. Hemantha (talk) 09:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment I don’t see WP:NBOOKS discarding interviews anywhere or saying that interviews can’t be used. Policy says non-trivial sources independent of the book itself, which TINE interview is. TINE also refers it to as ‘a carefully woven story’, says that ‘the book does not just lend a voice to Naazani, who narrates the story of millions of young girls who are driven to prostitution for myriad reasons.’ The Metro India is a proper review with a byline. I tried to read more but I didn’t find any policy that says if a journalist publishes their material at two platforms, it loses the value it carries. If the same review was published at two platforms with two different author names, then it was trouble because it (would have) meant that the author supplied readymade content to multiple people who published it. This is written independently. All publications solicit book for reviews (again, no policy that says any review written because the publication solicits books is null and void). I can’t think of anyone who goes to a book store and says, ‘This is the one I am going to review today’. Publications get a flood of books to review and they pick. Don’t know about Lucknow Tribune a lot, but I think we are too quick to dismiss a local print paper. There are two more coverages that I see on the same page looks legit too. Ts7852 (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * From WP:BOOKCRIT, This excludes ... publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties ... speak about the book. What is an interview if not that?A blog article republished in a publication of unknown reliability in a "lounge" back page isn't reliable by any measure. There is nothing to suggest the author is a journalist. Hemantha (talk) 13:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * You are right about TINE according to what you have cited. I am wrong. It was oversight on my part. I still would disagree on the other part. Ts7852 (talk) 01:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep The Metro review is credible. The same page of newspaper also critiques Gulaab Gang, a major film of that time. Also, having two full length reviews is WP:NFILM policy and not WP:NBOOKS policy. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 00:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Have you read NBOOKS? Let me highlight the relevant part - the book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works. The things that appear in "leisure" sections of much more reputed papers sometimes aren't credible; it takes much more than a simple statement to show why the "Metro Lounge" page is. Hemantha (talk) 13:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:35, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * from what I understand, reliability is linked with fact checking and scrutiny. A source could be less reliable than other but it doesn’t mean it’s not reliable at all. Unknown reliability doesn’t mean no reliability. Do we have evidence to believe that this isn’t a reliable source? And it’s a book review, something you would read in leisure. So leisure page seems justified. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 03:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 *  Comment: This is interesting. I thought more about this with some digging. There is clarity on the acceptability of Znews as a source. For The Lucknow Tribune publication, I located some other old newspaper that are available at wayback machine to review what kind of news they published, . The writing and pieces give a sense that there is editorial control and this is a reliable source. The specific source in question talks about the book and author in good detail and is far more than a trivial mention, making it a good source to contribute to notability. The Metro, I was not able to find other past online versions but looking at more material that is part of the source that’s included here, I see a good deal of original critique of various media at that point of time including Bangaru Kodipetta, Queen (2013 film), 300: Rise of an Empire, again indicating good editorial oversight at the publication. Even if the book was solicited, the review is written independently. This in totality, passes WP:NBOOKS and WP:GNG. Laptopinmyhands (talk) 01:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I restructured the article. The plot and author section could be expanded. The handful of brief reviews seem to just barely pass notability. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  19:58, 9 June 2022 (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.