Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kehkashan Awan (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 07:48, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kehkashan Awan[edit]

Kehkashan Awan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Another BLP on a non-notable actress created by BeauSuzanne (talk · contribs) 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 WP:Inherent notability. Although this topic survived a previous AfD but the discussion was compromised by sock puppets and IPs. —Saqib (talk | contribs) 11:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*::information Note: The creator of this BLP @BeauSuzanne is suspected UPE and a SPI is underway .Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:36, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Saqib unless something is confirmed, best not to mention it. One CU has already confirmed there is no technical evidence they are using multiple accounts. However, the CU did confirm heavy WP:LOUT activity so it might be fair to mention that. S0091 (talk) 17:54, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    S0091, I did wrote "suspected," not confirmed. Even if we can't confirm they're socks, one can say for sure they're UPEs. But your point taken.Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:57, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Saqib, you are casting aspersions here and you have been attacking this editor on many different discussions. This is verging on blockable behavior. Content creators have the right to weigh in on AFD discussion. Focus on the arguments and sources, not personalities. Or you could be facing a block. Liz Read! Talk! 04:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Liz, I've retracted my comment.Saqib (talk I contribs) 09:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 11:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Sources are mostly about other people where Awan is only mentioned or are interviews. Jang is the only source that has coverage about her and all it says is people found her Twitter account and she's now married. Looking at the sources in the Dhoop Kinare article, none mention her outside of listing her as a cast member so it does not appear her role was significant. S0091 (talk) 15:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources found in article and BEFORE are name mentions, listings, nothing meeting WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth. BLPs require strong sourcing.  // Timothy :: talk  18:44, 12 May 2024 (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.