Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ridoyanul Hoq


 * 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. Consensus is to Delete. But if you would like to continue to work on this article in User or Draft space, contact me. Liz Read! Talk! 21:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Ridoyanul Hoq

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

WP:BLP of an actor and filmmaker, not properly sourced as passing WP:CREATIVE. This was created in draftspace and then got moved into mainspace by its creator without going through any sort of WP:AFC review -- but the only notability claim it attempts is that he and his film credits exist, which isn't automatically enough in and of itself, and the referencing is entirely to directory entries and glancing namechecks of his existence in cast or crew lists on unreliable film blogs, with absolutely no evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage about him in genuinely reliable sources shown at all. Just having film credits is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt a person from having to be the subject of any coverage and analysis about him and his work in real media. Bearcat (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * You requested to delete an article name Ridoyanul Hoq. Because I moved the article directly from the draft space to the main space, and you also said that the references are from the blog site. Although this article was reviewed by 2 administrators before but I respect your opinion. One thing to note here is that: while moving the article from the draft to the main space with mobile, I didn't see the option like WP:AFC And I want to say about the references that, the references are not of any blog site. I'm new on Wikipedia, I don't know too much about Wikipedia policies, If you think my article still doesn't follow the Wikipedia rules, delete it ASAP. But if you think my article is suitable for main space, please remove the notice.￼ Frryan404 (talk) 02:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The problem, Frryan404, is not the alleged poor quality of some of the references in the current version or an earlier version. It's an alleged lack of reliable sources that would demonstrate that this man passes either WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. (He doesn't need to pass both.) At the end of this "Articles for deletion" process, somebody other than Bearcat will evaluate the arguments for and against deletion, and will either (A) delete the article or (B) remove the notice. In order to increase the chances of (B), the best thing for you to do is to improve the article, in particular by citing reliable sources that will demonstrate that the subject satisfies either WP:CREATIVE or WP:GNG. -- Hoary (talk) 03:07, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * We're not looking for sources that have his name in them, such that any directory entry you can find with his name in it would automatically be a notability-assisting reference — we're looking for reliable sources that represent substantive analysis of the significance of his work: news articles about him and his work, books about him and his work, and on and so forth. Bearcat (talk) 13:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There are some news, but the news titles are almost the same. That's why I didn't add them. Although this article won to be deleted, but should I add the news? Frryan404 (talk) 03:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * But the news is not entirely written about him. His credits are mentioned in the news along with other names. Frryan404 (talk) 03:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. No evidence of notability. The sources are all listings, with no discussion of Hoq. I was unable to find anything better. Maproom (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete The limited coverage does not meet WP:CREATIVE. LibStar (talk) 05:21, 16 November 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.