Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayantani Guhathakurta (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 delete. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Sayantani Guhathakurta
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails GNG. Doesn't appear to pass WP:NACTOR which says, "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions". The actress has surely roles in multiple films/shows that might be notable or not but I do not find anything that's significant with this actress, of course, when we say "multiple". ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  14:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  14:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  14:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  14:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 06:39, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. Also, kindly refer to Talk:Sayantani Guhathakurta to know how & why the AfD discussion call has been taken by the nominator. -Hatchens (talk) 15:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , hey there, I have been following this discussion lately. I'd like to know your views on WP:NACTOR, (precisely what has been already quoted): Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
 * I'd want your clarification if having played main roles in 11 feature length commercial movies and 4 popular Television shows doesn't qualify as being "significant role". I understand that you have some valid arguments with the appreciative tone of the article (which can be fixed) but isn't deleteing this article pushing the ball too far? This article gas gone through multiple reviews from draft stage to mainspace, I'm sure the other reviewers who have reviewed this article were not "Paid". Then why should we delete a perfectly noteable and well cited article which exists not just in English but also in other languages?
 * Thank you
 *  Innocentbunny     TALK  02:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The article didn't came through "multiple reviews" because it was directly published in the mainspace, rather than being submitted to AfC. That said, you should take back your wrong statements. I'm not able to find that "she has had main/lead roles in those few movies/series which have articles on Wikipedia". Can you provide reliable sources indicating that "her roles weren't just roles but main significant roles...". ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  07:54, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not "well cited". There are about nine citation tags. In such case, it is definitely not "perfectly notable". Did you even look at the history and condition of article? I guess no. That's why you are making absurd statements. ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  07:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , these couple of IDs should focus on enhancing the page so that WP:HEY can be applied. But, instead of doing that they are more keen to justify their opinions. Have you seen the commonality... none of these two IDs talks about the RED FLAGs we raised or questioned. - Hatchens (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Curbon7 (talk) 04:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Leaving aside the drama of paid editing/coi, it's clear that the actress in question has quite a lot of press in The Times of India where she is the main subject. However, these sources are essentially tabloid type articles rather than serious journalism, and they don't really serve any purpose beyond publicity. (i.e. no serious criticism or review of her work) However, they do indicate a certain level of celebrity and verify that she's had roles within some notable projects which does indicate a certain degree of notability. However, ultimately without any serious reviews of her work it is impossible to determine the significance of these roles in relation to the criteria at WP:NACTRESS, and on their own I don't think they are quality enough RS to meet GNG either. It's possible that some reviews of the films themselves, possibly in foreign language references, could verify that she does meet NACTRESS, but in the absence of any sources of quality deletion is the best option.4meter4 (talk) 00:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete An early-stage actor who is getting some coverage in a single newspaper, known for supporting early-stage actors. Most of it is interviews, consisting of supporting a specific film. There is very little coverage apart from that, indicating she is non-notable. In the Chikati Gadilo Chithakotudu where she plays the ghost, she is casted 12th. Non-notable at this time.   scope_creep Talk  09:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom, for failing to meet WP:NACTOR. Ifnord (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Checked all the notable films/TV serials that are notable (listed on this page) and she is part of. None of them have her in significant role. One proxy to figure this (not a great golden rule but helps) is to check the position in which the subject is listed in the cast section. I usually consider top 2 (sometimes 3 depending on context) as significant roles. Here, if we were being liberal, Chikati Gadilo Chithakotudu could be counted as a significant role (mind you, if we were being liberal which we may decide not to because of all the COI and more). And even if we were, WP:NACTOR required 'multiple' significant roles. If you should argue against this, you should demonstrate how any of the other roles are significant. One way to do this is to establish how she has maximum or next to maximum screen time in any film or show. At the moment, this is not qualifying. In future, it might be. And if you decide to create it in future, do consult the closing admin or other editors involved so that we would all save some time. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 01:55, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:NACTOR. She doesn't appear in any significant roles in multiple movies or etc. —  The Chunky urf  Al Kashmiri    (Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)
 * Redirect to Chikati Gadilo Chithakotudu: From a quick look at article, I can see several uncited claims and the sources added are not significant in-depth coverage to qualify for an article under WP:GNG. Neither is WP:NACTOR met, the aforesaid film is the only one in which she had a major role and redirecting to it would be better than deletion imo. She needs one or two more significant roles in a notable production and she will clear WP:NACTOR. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 06:03, 14 September 2021 (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.