Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rehana Fathima (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Those advocating keeping the article improved it or supplied sources, which were not challenged. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:55, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Rehana Fathima
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

The subject does not meet the Wikipedia guidelines for notability. The subject has only recieved coverage for some contriversial events. The users and  (creator), who participated in previous AFD to vote as keep were blocked for socketpuppetry. is also a suspected socketpuppet. Regards Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Kichu🐘 Discuss 13:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, clearly meets WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV from 2017, 2018, 2020, and 2021 . Not a WP:BLP1E. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Being in the news does not mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. Its true that the subject has been covered in multiple sources for some events. But that doesnt mean she passes WP:GNG. Regards Kichu🐘 Discuss</i> 14:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: people who perform some symbolic act of protest in support of a political issue may appear in the news, but that does not entitle them to have a Wikipedia page about them. Suppose I run naked in the streets (repeatedly) to support some political movement I may get similar amount of media coverage. News items like "the serial streaker strikes again" will make headlines :)  Will you support creation of a Wikipedia page about me ?    Sahir 11:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: It seems to be a promotional article, which may contradict Wikipedia's policies.There are no significant contributions from this person and sources are mostly controversial issue . Padavalam🌂   ►  15:03, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - the subject has had significant coverage in independent reliable sources. -- Toddy1 (talk) 15:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Bio subject is controversial but meets GNG. Our test for notability is not whether or not the topic should get SIGCOV, out test is whether or not the topic did get SIGCOV in "reliable sources that are independent of the subject." HouseOfChange (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Some people like Thjarkur have been ardent supporters of this page because they got the wrong idea about the whole thing. She is neither a famous feminist nor a human rights activist in the conventional sense. She was an employee of a telecom company in Kerala and became famous in social media as a bikini model or some such thing. When the Entry of women to Sabarimala controversy flared up she appeared in the news for attempting to enter the temple. She may be mentioned in this page, but does not merit a page on her own. Sahir 11:09, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Agree with Sahir. Three users from Kerala including myself voted as delete as we know about this person very well. The subject is notable only for creating controversies. So it would be better if we have more users from Kerala to participate in this discussion. I am going to inform the users from Kerala that I know to participate in this discussion. Regards. Kichu🐘 <i style="color:blue">Discuss</i> 12:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Agree with the opinion that She is neither a famous feminist nor a human rights activist in the conventional sense. Just recieved some coverage from national medias only for controversial events. Better to merge with Entry of women to Sabarimala.The article itself was created by a sock who later got blocked. I also suspect this article was created for an undisclosed payment. Poppi fied  <i style="color:skyblue">talk</i> 13:43, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment'In my previous comment, I clearly said already said I am going to notify the users from Kerala that I know to participate in this AFD. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Poppified#Need_participations_from_users_from_Kerala. Since I know this user, who is also from Kerala I left a message, please tell your opinion which is not all canvassing. The user is also uninvolved in previous AFD. I have never said to vote in favour of me. I have also told  to notify any other users from Kerala that he knows to participate in this AFD as I dont know any other active users from Kerala.Regards Kichu🐘 <i style="color:blue">Discuss</i> 15:05, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete : Clearly fails WP:GNG. Just because this person appeared in news, it doesn't mean they are notable. This person is notable in certain areas only because of the controversial issues surrounding the person. So I believe this article should be deleted from main space .  Ken Tony  Shall we discuss? 16:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The article also constitute a lot with WP:NOTNEWS. So, it also supports the idea of cutting off of the article from main space.  Ken Tony  Shall we discuss? 17:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: Noticed you added a "canvassed" tag to my vote. Kindly read the page wp:canvassing on what is and isn't appropriate  notification about an event or a vote. The "canvassed" tag you added here is wholly inappropriate. Thank you - Sahir 02:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG, this article includes significant coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the subject, WP:SUSTAINED over several years, about her career as an activist, including but not limited to: Times of India, 2020, News Minute, 2018, Scroll.in, 2018. Beccaynr (talk) 04:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I am working to revise the article before I conduct additional research, but I now better understand that her actions have been deeply offensive to many people; this seems to help explain why she appears to meet WP:GNG, because the offense she has caused, and the consequences and reactions she has experienced, have generated significant news coverage. Beccaynr (talk) 04:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: Sources confirm notability.--Ipigott (talk) 10:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep SIGCOV in multiple RS; easily passes the GNG.--Goldsztajn (talk) 11:11, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: When sources are enough to demonstrate GNG, we don't need any other "notability litmus test". ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  05:17, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets GNG and SIGCOV with a great margin... A simple google search brings multiple sources from reliable news outlets. I don't understand the argument above that she is not notable although admitting that she received "some coverage from national medias" for a controversy. The point here that she has received media coverage from a national media. Kolma8 (talk) 15:02, 21 February 2021 (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.