Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rudhraksh J


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Rudhraksh J

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

Rudhraksh J

The actual subject of this article is an actor who has had one major role and so does not satisfy acting notability. There has already been a deletion discussion using his full name; see Articles for deletion/Rudhraksh Jaiswal, and Rudhraksh Jaiswal is a redirect. This article has an abbreviated form of his name as a novel method of gaming of article titles. The AFD was tainted by sockpuppetry by both the Keep and the Delete voters, but that does not warrant trying to evade the name. The redirect is not locked, so the originator could have expanded the redirect, or asked for Deletion Review. A review of the article shows that this article also does not establish acting notability or general notability. A review of the references shows that they are not about the actor, but about films about the Mahabharata, an interview with an actress, and an interview with the subject. There is also a draft, Draft:Rudhraksh Jaiswal. It should be left so that it can be expanded if he has another major role. This title should be deleted because it is not a plausible search term and is an article about a non-notable person. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting as I believe Soft Deletion is not possible due to the previous AFD under a different article title. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Film,  and India. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I'd typically support a WP:ATD-R alternative, but I agree with the nom that it seems an implausible search term, which would become a WP:R3 redirect to delete. Options to expand the draft or re-edit the redirect at the appropriate time when additional roles/coverage can be added should be utilized, as also stated by nom. -2pou (talk) 16:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete seems the best course, sources are a no-go, search term is too broad so that I find anyone with this name. Oaktree b (talk) 23:26, 13 August 2023 (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.