Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Shaun Sanghani - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

409:; while it would be fallacy to suggest this warrants an article for every recipient, it may suggest that those named are not always of an "up and coming" variety. It's also arguable that the "Prince of Alexandria" profile in Scene magazine and the first Deadline article cited tend toward being substantial, as opposed to passing or trivial mentions. Taken together, these sources might establish notability. I am also not seeing guidance to suggest that we tend to delete articles about film producers in the 401:- I can see where many of the concerns are coming from. I have amended the reference for the Variety line to one which more directly and substantially addresses the subject; the honor itself also suggests a level of recognition by industry peers, as the recipients are chosen via industry submissions which are then curated by Variety's reporters and critics. Additionally, articles exist for other recent recipients, such as 481:
My understanding is that, while an executive producer credit can indicate varying degrees of involvement, a producer/produced by credit (such as many of those here) is traditionally understood in the industry to indicate one of the main, actually hands-on producers of a project, which is why they are
465:
Most films that are created now have multiple producers so the producer may not be particularly notable, even though they are attached to a famous film with famous actors. As always secondary sources that are of a sufficient depth of coverage are the standard to prove notability. Here there is a lot
539:#3 or such. PS. If it was one or two items, I'd agree with the nom, but if he is linked as producer or such to something like ten blue links, that's probably on the keep side of borderline, at least for me. Ping me if you want to convince me otherwise, I am always open to discussion. -- 582:
I am not seeing anything beyond what is there, as I said, it is just my personal view of what to do in borderline cases - in this one, I think there's enough stuff he had his name in as credits etc. that he probably should have an entry. A weak argument, hence my weak keep vote.
209: 304: 567:
Do you fancy looking for some additional evidence. I really don't mind withdrawing it, if you give me an inkling of summat. I don't want him deleted if there is inkling that he is notable.
162: 323: 285: 413:
article. Given the fairly extensive credits of the subject, it's likely that further sources could be added in order to bring the article to its full potential, as well.
203: 342: 266: 94: 109: 169: 535:. The coverage of him is sparse, but he was a writer/director for many items, and a good half of them are blue links. That suggests he may pass 449: 135: 130: 89: 82: 17: 139: 466:
of name drops, some minor coverage, a single primary source (an interview) but no real secondary sources of depth. Not a thing.
122: 224: 103: 99: 191: 504: 431: 633: 40: 185: 453: 381: 600:
I've not found much either. It is really all in the article and its not sufficient to establish notability.
610: 595: 577: 551: 525: 491: 476: 456: 422: 393: 353: 334: 315: 296: 277: 258: 181: 64: 445: 536: 629: 36: 410: 369: 231: 217: 126: 377: 245: 589: 545: 487: 441: 418: 389: 346: 327: 308: 289: 270: 78: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
628:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
365: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
603: 570: 469: 251: 197: 241: 516: 118: 70: 55: 585: 562: 541: 483: 414: 385: 156: 406: 402: 624:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
507:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
434:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
305:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
248:. Presented references are name drops. Nothing of depth. 482:
so coveted and one sees so few of them on a given film.
152: 148: 144: 216: 440:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –
513:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 230: 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 636:). No further edits should be made to this page. 341:Note: This discussion has been included in the 322:Note: This discussion has been included in the 303:Note: This discussion has been included in the 284:Note: This discussion has been included in the 265:Note: This discussion has been included in the 324:list of Television-related deletion discussions 286:list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions 8: 110:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! 340: 321: 302: 283: 264: 372:articles about producers. His listing in 343:list of Film-related deletion discussions 267:list of Ohio-related deletion discussions 586:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 542:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 24: 368:sales person and film producer. 95:Introduction to deletion process 394:15:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC) 354:22:54, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 335:22:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 316:22:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 297:22:52, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 278:22:52, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 259:21:59, 23 September 2019 (UTC) 1: 611:18:33, 16 October 2019 (UTC) 596:03:46, 10 October 2019 (UTC) 578:00:42, 10 October 2019 (UTC) 492:00:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC) 65:17:32, 17 October 2019 (UTC) 552:05:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC) 526:18:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC) 477:23:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC) 457:10:47, 1 October 2019 (UTC) 423:03:10, 1 October 2019 (UTC) 85:(AfD)? Read these primers! 653: 384:variety, pardon the pun. 626:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 83:Articles for deletion 528: 524: 459: 370:We tend to delete 356: 337: 318: 299: 280: 100:Guide to deletion 90:How to contribute 63: 644: 608: 606: 592: 575: 573: 566: 548: 523: 521: 514: 512: 510: 508: 474: 472: 439: 437: 435: 351: 332: 313: 294: 275: 256: 254: 235: 234: 220: 172: 160: 142: 80: 62: 60: 53: 34: 652: 651: 647: 646: 645: 643: 642: 641: 640: 634:deletion review 604: 602: 594: 590: 571: 569: 560: 550: 546: 529: 517: 515: 503: 501: 470: 468: 460: 430: 428: 411:common outcomes 366:run of the mill 347: 328: 309: 290: 271: 252: 250: 177: 168: 133: 117: 114: 77: 74: 56: 54: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 650: 648: 639: 638: 620: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 584: 555: 554: 540: 511: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 438: 427: 426: 425: 396: 380:and is of the 358: 357: 338: 319: 300: 281: 238: 237: 174: 119:Shaun Sanghani 113: 112: 107: 97: 92: 75: 73: 71:Shaun Sanghani 68: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 649: 637: 635: 631: 627: 622: 621: 612: 609: 607: 599: 598: 597: 593: 587: 581: 580: 579: 576: 574: 564: 559: 558: 557: 556: 553: 549: 543: 538: 534: 531: 530: 527: 522: 520: 509: 506: 493: 489: 485: 480: 479: 478: 475: 473: 464: 463: 462: 461: 458: 455: 451: 447: 443: 436: 433: 424: 420: 416: 412: 408: 404: 400: 397: 395: 391: 387: 383: 382:up-and-coming 379: 375: 371: 367: 363: 360: 359: 355: 352: 350: 344: 339: 336: 333: 331: 325: 320: 317: 314: 312: 306: 301: 298: 295: 293: 287: 282: 279: 276: 274: 268: 263: 262: 261: 260: 257: 255: 247: 243: 233: 229: 226: 223: 219: 215: 211: 208: 205: 202: 199: 196: 193: 190: 187: 183: 180: 179:Find sources: 175: 171: 167: 164: 158: 154: 150: 146: 141: 137: 132: 128: 124: 120: 116: 115: 111: 108: 105: 101: 98: 96: 93: 91: 88: 87: 86: 84: 79: 72: 69: 67: 66: 61: 59: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 625: 623: 601: 568: 537:WP:NCREATIVE 532: 518: 502: 467: 442:filelakeshoe 429: 398: 373: 361: 349:CAPTAIN RAJU 348: 330:CAPTAIN RAJU 329: 311:CAPTAIN RAJU 310: 292:CAPTAIN RAJU 291: 273:CAPTAIN RAJU 272: 249: 239: 227: 221: 213: 206: 200: 194: 188: 178: 165: 76: 57: 50:no consensus 49: 47: 31: 28: 605:scope_creep 572:scope_creep 471:scope_creep 407:Nancy Grant 403:Xavier Gens 253:scope_creep 204:free images 591:reply here 547:reply here 519:Sandstein 378:in passing 58:Sandstein 630:talk page 533:Weak keep 246:WP:SIGCOV 37:talk page 632:or in a 505:Relisted 432:Relisted 163:View log 104:glossary 39:or in a 563:Piotrus 484:Stm2193 415:Stm2193 386:Bearian 374:Variety 210:WP refs 198:scholar 136:protect 131:history 81:New to 362:Delete 242:WP:BIO 240:Fails 182:Google 140:delete 225:JSTOR 186:books 170:Stats 157:views 149:watch 145:links 16:< 488:talk 419:talk 405:and 399:Keep 390:talk 244:and 218:FENS 192:news 153:logs 127:talk 123:edit 376:is 232:TWL 161:– ( 583:-- 490:) 454:🐱 452:) 448:/ 421:) 392:) 364:- 345:. 326:. 307:. 288:. 269:. 212:) 155:| 151:| 147:| 143:| 138:| 134:| 129:| 125:| 52:. 588:| 565:: 561:@ 544:| 486:( 450:c 446:t 444:( 417:( 388:( 236:) 228:· 222:· 214:· 207:· 201:· 195:· 189:· 184:( 176:( 173:) 166:· 159:) 121:( 106:) 102:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Sandstein
17:32, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Shaun Sanghani

Articles for deletion
How to contribute
Introduction to deletion process
Guide to deletion
glossary
Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
Shaun Sanghani
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.