Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajiv Kathpalia


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 14:53, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Rajiv Kathpalia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only one RS Source, which has a small mention. Second source is about a professor with the same name. Greek Legend (talk) 02:06, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

This actor should not be confused with an architect named "Rajeev Kathpalia". --Greek Legend (talk) 17:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC) confirmed blocked sockpuppetAtlantic306 (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 03:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as I myself patrolled this at NPP and found nothing from this current article satisfying the applicable notability, thus it's not convincing enough to keep. SwisterTwister   talk  03:57, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment you should have noticed the one reliable source in the article which counts towards notability. Atlantic306 (talk) 23:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment – Please read WP:NEXIST, part of Wikipedia's Notability guideline page, where it clearly states, " Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article ". Your !vote carries little weight, because it does not appear to be based upon any type of additional source searches. North America1000 15:23, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  13:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep as a well known Indian television actor, the reliable source in the article from the telegraph (Indian version) represents significant coverage, at least one more RS needed. Atlantic306 (talk) 16:35, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The Calcutta Telegraph publishes many paid articles about Indian entertainment. Only RS source is TimesofIndia. India has many English sources which can prove notability. He is an active actor. He is not an Indian actor from 1956 that we can't find more than one RS. Greek Legend (talk) 17:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for the info, how did you find that out about the Calcutta Telegraph? Atlantic306 (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Rajiv Kathpalia is a well known actor on television and his debut film is releasing this year. Relevant reverences have been provided and more will be shared as we get them. Please keep this article. User:Shonell Thakker : How was the result keep? Greek Legend (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2016 (UTC) The references are in place. I dont understand what is the debate about? When a page is being considered for deletion and a query is raised and the reply is given why keep the debate open? just a query User:Shonell Thakker  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Reasonable sourcing provided, likely to meet WP:NACTOR AusLondonder (talk) 02:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:08, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not sure what some folks are describing as reasonable sourcing? Facebook?  Hotstar (an even less reliable version of YouTube, which isn't considered reliable)? A press release masquerading as a news story from the Telegraph (becoming more and more common in Indian press)?  Perhaps it's the YouTube cite? Or, wow, could it be the citation (which doesn't actually lead to anything about this person) from that incredibly wonderfully reliable Mega Model Hunt?  I don't have access to the Times piece, so AGF, it's a good cite. That leaves a single citation for an actor who meets non of the criteria of WP:ACTOR. Searches turned up a single trivial mention on News, zip on Newspapers, Books, Scholar, Highbeam, or JStor.  Onel 5969  TT me 16:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - one significant coverage is hardly enough, assuming the piece on The Telegraph is reliable, which honestly does look like a press release. The piece on Times Of India is what I believe to be a photo of the subject as a model in an ad, fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG— UY Scuti Talk  19:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - A note about the article creator User:Shonell Thakker. A simple google search shows he/she is employed by a entertainment-related PR agency in India. The agency is currently assigned to promote the film M.S._Dhoni_:_The_Untold_Story, in which Rajiv plays a role. Other edits from the user shows all edits have been made with the sole intention of promoting the film and its actors, which is a violation of  single purpose account. Additionally, the editor is in violation of  paid editing and  Conflict of Interest. The sources are poor in quality with the basic objective of somehow making the actor seem notable. 14.140.50.82 (talk) 10:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

All those claiming issues with facts and citations seem to have their fact checks questionable too. Google search on article creator User:Shonell Thakker; thats me; shows career details. I have worked in the entertainment industry way early in my career. I am not employed by any PR agency neither am I promoting a film, neither am I hired by the film M.S._Dhoni_:_The_Untold_Story to promote the film. Before accusing or assuming please check your facts. Also there is no proof of money exchange, which hasnt happened coz I AM NOT EMPLOYED BY EITHER RAJIV OR THE PRODUCTION HOUSE!!! As far as the telegraph article goes, its a recognised newspaper. There is also an article by Times of India Bombay times. Just to counter argue, TOI also charges for articles how come that passes as the 'Reliable Article' in most other articles? YouTube and Hotstar links are given to show the proof of the casting and direction. If the visual isnt a proof enough then what is? Every single statement has a proof link. As far as film M.S._Dhoni_:_The_Untold_Story goes its on its early stages of promotions so links will be added as needed. Still if anyone has a query discuss instead of throwing baseless accusations around — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18:09, 11 April 2016‎  (talk • contribs) Shonell Thakker


 * Delete I read through it and it reads like a self promotion piece for an upcoming movie, not seeing the notability factor to warrant a page. Heyyouoverthere (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm not concerned about notability, but the article reads promotional to me. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  06:24, 14 April 2016 (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.