Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rubina Dilaik (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. Clear consensus to keep following relisting. The Bushranger One ping only 01:17, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Rubina Dilaik
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Indian TV actress who acted in one TV show. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Why does it get 45 hits on Google News Search, with most of them being reputed newspapers? Secret of success  ( talk )  15:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I will list out few. Obviously the ones in my favour. Nine TV stars talk of what they love abt Diwali, Zee TV's new logo came out & subject danced, Holi celebration shown in the show, Zee Rishtey Awards and subject was present, Season 2 is coming, season 2 is here, Season 2 is awesome, Gold Awards presented and subject was present, Aman Verma has negative role, Fire on the set, Television awards ceremony and subject was present, Zee's entertainment evening and subject danced, Cant summarize this, you have to read. My summery will be "TRIVIA"., Article on whats TV fashion, Benaf is coming on show, Aman is coming on show, Season 2 is here, season 2 is back with bang. Listed out 18 out of 25. & hey, i got only 25, not 45. But i dont consider any of them good enough. Good chunck of those are about the show, or subject's presence in some ceremony. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 18:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 01:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep I can see notability through these four articles exclusively about the actress:, , , -- Anbu121  ( talk me ) 17:00, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep – This person passes WP:BASIC and WP:GNG:
 * All praises for Rubina Dilaik - Times Of India
 * Rubina and Avinash rubbish rumours of their marriage - | TV | MSN India Entertainment
 * Avinash and Rubina married! - Times Of India
 * Rubina Dilaik In Love With Mauritius [newKerala.com News # 49083&#93;
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 10:39, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per sources found and offered showing a meeting of WP:GNG. Stub article could use improvement certainly, but AFD is not for WP:CLEANUP.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:22, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Question (not just for Michael): Isn't this basically a biography? What are we gonna write in it about notability? That she acted in two seasons of a show, married her co-star & went on honeymoon to Mauritius? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 05:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yup. Its "basically" a biography. We share what sources offer for us to share. Or do you mean that we should specificaly report IN the Wikipeidia article that she meets our notability criteria by being the recipient of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources for various aspects of her life? We report what the nedia has reported... presenting a neutral and sourced encyclopedic entry for her, based upon coverage in those reliable sources. HOW to present that information, even for someone famous for being famous, is a matter for regular editng... and such "difficulties" do not require deletion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:45, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not mean that we should write that she meets our GNG criteria. But when a reader comes across this article and says, "Hmm! Lets see what this lady is notable for for being included in an encyclopedia"; what are we giving that reader? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 09:23, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... one would think we would simply tone down what the press has written to neutralize it, and give our readers exactly what would be expected from a centralized place for information: That she was in Nachle Ve with Saroj Khan, was the lead character in Choti Bahu] and Choti Bahu 2, that she was both Miss Shimla and Miss North and, if verifiable, we also include elements of her personal life such as where she was born, where she was educated, and whom she married. We do not always have momentous things such as first man on the moon or inventor of polio vaccine as assertions of notability... and indeed have far more lesser but none-the-less acceptable "stub" or "start" or "c" articles than we do major when the GNG is met.  That the media thinks she's a big enough deal is why she qualifies for inclusion. We share what we can verify. If her career were to stop tomorrow, we might discuss merging the article somewhere else... but it serves the project for now for this to remain and grow over time.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:05, 17 July 2012 (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.