Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shuja Asad


 * 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! 07:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Shuja Asad

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

Another BLP on a non-notable actor created by who has a dubious editing history. The subject does not meet criteria outlined in the relevant WP:NACTOR as well basic WP:GNG. No evidence indicating significant roles in notable films, TV dramas, etc. Merely being in a film or TV drama does not make one Inherently notable. — Saqib ( talk  |  contribs ) 18:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib  ( talk  |  contribs ) 18:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television,  and Advertising.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:08, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - Based on the following source assessment. On its face, the subject appears notable based on the number of references, but clearly fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Maybe after the upcoming film he is supposedly in there will be more press but WP:TOOSOON at this point in time. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * YouTube, labeled as "Something Haute" on the page but it is in fact NOT that publication. it is simply on their YouTube channel. Not a reliable source.
 * Social Diary, and interview and clear promotional piece.
 * Galaxy Hollywood, Outside of this being unreliable (blog, no editorial oversight), it only verifies his role in a film. Verification does not equal notability.
 * Dawn, as with above, it verifies a role but nothing substantial about the subject himself.
 * YouTube, another YouTube video masquerading as a reliable source. It is the channel for FUCHSIA Magazine which I cannot tell if it is a reliable source but the YouTube content definitely is not.
 * Ary News, translated byline as "news desk" indicates clear WP:NEWSORGINDIA and not reliable for notability.
 * Gulf News, contributor tabloid content that can be purchased on Upwork. Not reliable.
 * DND, verifies a role but nothing substantial about him.
 * Galaxy Hollywood, verifies role, but nothing substantial about him.
 * Mag The Weekly, willing to bet this is also unreliable if I did, but on its face it is a promotional interview with several subjects. Not reliable for at least notability.
 * 24 News HD, "News Desk" byline which is clear NEWSORGINDIA. Not reliable.
 * Ary News, "Web Desk" byline, more NEWSORGINDIA. Not Reliable.
 * Ary News, English version, "web desk" byline, more NEWSORGINDIA. Not reliable.
 * YouTube, many issues but besides being YouTube, this is the channel of HUM TV meaning nothing would be considered independent.
 * Mag The Weekly, another one from this publication where I do not believe would be a reliable publication. Regardless, byline of "Mag The Weekly" indicates NEWSORGINDIA so not reliable.
 * The News, another that verifies a role, but nothing significant about the subject.


 * Keep Shuja is a notable actor. Gulf news has written about Shuja it also covers many other news as well it is used in Arab countries and Something Haute is a Magazine just like Aurora Magazine Dawn.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 07:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC))
 * As the creator of this BLP, you've to provide references to support claims made about her significant roles. — Saqib ( talk  |  contribs ) 09:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Gulf News is a paid placement and falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. I can go to Upwork and have an article published in Gulf News right now that outlines the status of this AfD. It is literally that easy! --CNMall41 (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per @CNMall41 2600:1700:103A:D800:3D53:1D07:BF86:3DEB (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * See WP:ATA — Saqib ( talk  |  contribs ) 19:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * All of a sudden, an unknown IP address with just 3 contributions is voting delete and supporting the nominator. Strange. Libraa2019 (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have a great explanation for that as the same happened to a recent nomination I made. Although I will AGF (or at least as much as saying "strange"). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Daily Times
 * Shuja's role Sardar Barlas Khan in popular drama Khaie was very well received among the viewers. Some background about how Shuja started his carrer.(BeauSuzanne (talk) 15:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC))
 * BeauSuzanne Wait - Is Khaie considered a significant work? From what I've seen, it doesn't appear to be, which means the subject fails NACTOR. — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 21:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Has sufficient coverage in reliable news sources like Daily Times and Gulf News. Both links are mentioned below.

Gulf News

Also he is mentioned in many reliable sources like, Libraa2019 (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla  Ohhhhhh, no! 06:02, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As CNMall41 pointed out, Gulf News's coverage is considered a paid placement and falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The other sources don't delve into the subject with the required depth as outlined in WP:GNG to establish WP:N. — Saqib ( talk  |  contribs ) 18:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Gulf News is nowhere mentioned in WP:NEWSORGINDIA and India and Pakistan are different countries if you dont know. Libraa2019 (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This is getting old and seems to be a WP:CIR issue. NEWSORGINDIA says, "Examples of sponsored content include supplements published by" - Note my emphasis on "examples." It does not say "these ARE the publications" or that the example list is inclusive. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to go through other pages and point out where you have used publications listed as examples in NEWSORGINDIA if you like. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be useful for the closing admin to make a decision. — Saqib  ( talk  |  contribs ) 20:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Didn't need to go far. The creation of Abu Aleeha shows this and |access-date=2024-01-29 this which were the first two references I checked. I am also concerned based on the permission of the image used on that page as well. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:36, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * CNMall41, You're scaring them. — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 10:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * SPI filed. — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 16:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Definitely not my intention. The image permission does show a clear COI however. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, a WP:NACTOR since his role in "Khaie", received recognition and coverage from the masses. Even sources included covers the subject matter.
 * 182.182.29.217 (talk) 22:22, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 182.182.29.217, Can you provide evidence of your claim in RS? — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 08:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Gulf News one is a WP:RS. 182.182.29.217 (talk) 09:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Don't just vaguely mention the source, provide the coverage right here. Share the link that can establish WP:GNG. — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 09:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sources mentioned as per @Libraa2019. 182.182.29.217 (talk) 09:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * But the coverage provided by @Libraa2019 has been rejected by  above. — Saqib  ( talk  I  contribs ) 10:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I share the same pov as @Libraa2019 does in this AfD, so that's why I voted Keep and still stands by my decision. 182.182.29.217 (talk) 10:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * IP blocked — Saqib ( talk  I  contribs ) 21:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. The detailed source evaluation by CNMall41 indicates very little independent secondary content has been written about the subject by RS. JoelleJay (talk) 00:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The DT link has maybe a sentence of secondary independent coverage, the rest of it is regurgitating what the subject said and fails independence. Additionally, the article uses generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer, indicating it is unreliable. JoelleJay (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Per the nice source analysis above, it's WP:TOOSOON. There's some fluff in the article as well (the early life section could be condensed a fair amount), but the career section doesn't show WP:NACTOR being met.  Ravensfire  (talk) 22:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: per CNMall4 and their findings. Not notable at all. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 23:08, 10 May 2024 (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.