Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arushi Nishank (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. ✗plicit 14:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arushi Nishank[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined G4, wrongly in my humble opinion, this non-notable actress has featured in three music videos and two unreleased films. Sourcing is scrappy to say the least, passing mentions, puff pieces (too many about her efforts to 'clean rivers', which is not a claim for notability advanced in the article) and references to her famous father do not get us past WP:GNG. They didn't in 2021 and they don't now. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 10:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Dance, and Uttarakhand. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete: per nom. SuperSharanya (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2023 (UTC)~~ [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 12:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CU note SuperSharanya above is a sock of the blocked user. Girth Summit _(blether) 10:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: BLP Fails GNG and BIO. Sources in the article do not show N. BEFORE didn't show anything that is IS RS with SIGCOV showing N. I started a source eval table, but they were all promo or insubstantial.

BLPs need clearly IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability to avoid abuse per well known core policy (WP:V and WP:BLP) and guidelines (WP:BIO and WP:IS, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV). // Timothy :: talk 11:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Citations are irrelevant for establishing notability here as routine/non-significant coverage or non-coverage of the subject. Fails GNG. Delete. Macktheknifeau (talk) 11:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.