Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siddharth Mahesh


 * 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 redirect to Sipaayi (2016 film). The third relist failed to attract additional input, so I'm just going with the middle-of-the-road option. If events evolve and better sourcing appears in the future, no prejudice against moving this back. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Siddharth Mahesh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable actor. This would be a PRODBLP case, but IMDB confirms he exists and has been in a film. —Guanaco 10:24, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 12:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 12:13, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Lacks in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources and actor in one notable film fails WP:ACTOR so Draftify or Redirect to Sipaayi (2016 film) per WP:NOTYET and protect till the release of Garuda. GSS (talk |c|em ) 06:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric  13:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Draft has the lead in one film so move to draft until release of second film which will provide more coverage Atlantic306 (talk) 20:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  20:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Keep or redirect? There seems to be no policy-based reason for draftifying if a redirect can be created until he gains more notability.
 * Keep I am seeing enough passing mentions, as well as some semi-in-depth stuff here. Combined with the Times of India source already in the article, I'd say that is good enough for GNG. Especially as we know more in depth stuff will come out with the next film that is in production. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  13:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  09:09, 17 July 2017 (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.