476:
based on other published information: they aren't written by the families. Not to mention the extreme systemic bias that would exist for us to treat a North
American paper of record as establishing notability but to say it is not the case for a paper of record in one of the largest English-speaking countries in the world that simply happens to be in Asia?
535:#2. It also is highly indicative that they are extremely likely to pass the GNG if one had access to the sourcing the authors had when they wrote the summary of the individual's life. The notability guideline makes it clear that when evidence is presented that sourcing likely exists, this is enough. See
639:
I was wrong to use the confrontational word "wrong" and withdraw it. But there is no time limit for developing an article, and when as here the likely sources are undigitised newspapers existing only in India it will probably stay a one-liner - with a substantial filmography - for a very long time. I
475:
proof of notability on the
English Knowledge (XXG). I think there are obvious reasons why this should also apply to other papers of record in major countries: they have similar vetting, prestige, and editorial integrity of the times, and its also clear that they would only be able to compile the obit
459:
I couldn’t disagree more. Sites like New York Times, The
Guardian, in this case The Hindu, can publish obituaries for individuals who never obtain Knowledge (XXG) articles. Sure can be because no one got around to writing one up, but most of the time it’s because there’s not much of worth to include.
440:
feature length obituaries in papers of record are enough to make an individual notable and proof of passing the GNG. The only way the Hindu could have compiled that obit was is there was significant coverage in other reliable sourcing, making it proof of meeting our notability standards.
494:
that were redlink a We’re oosted with a NYT source and by months end never gained an article on
Knowledge (XXG). My point is that being written about in any worldwide newspaper or site doesn’t automatically mean the person written about is notable enough to sustain an article here.
539:. We have an obit in a paper of record written by their staff reporters. That is more than enough to pass ANYBIO #2 and shows an extreme likelihood of being able to pass the GNG per NPOSSIBLE. That alone is enough, but given that Xx236 was also able to find sourcing in the
264:
the only information in this single-sentence article is a note that
Shivraj was an Indian actor and the note about when he died, followed by a list of films he was in. Information in the article could be merged with an article on one of these films.
399:
calls him "one of the most recognisable faces in the Hindi cinema of the 1950s and the 60s". Given the era, he's likely to have additional coverage in off-line sources. Have you attempted a search of newspaper archives and books?
384:
Many people who had obituaries published by The Hindu that I added to the deaths list fail to gain articles after a month and thus get removed. Having an obituary in a notable publishment doesn’t equate notability.
172:
221:
654:
The article sat bare for five months. That’s why I figured there wasn’t anything else to add after that point if no one including the article creator were adding anything for five months.
612:- there's sufficient indication of notability as per User:Tony Ballioni and User:Gidonb, and nom's argument that the article should be deleted just because it's still a stub is wrong IMO.
574:
totally fails GNG. Only one of the sources is reliable, that requires multiple reliable sources. IMDb seeks to cover everything, Knowledge (XXG) only covers actors of significant impact.
125:
628:
I’m not wrong for thinking an article that’s only thing to say about the subject is that they were an actor isn’t notable. If he were there’d be a lot more added to the article.
241:
166:
520:
Only if they meet GNG. My point still stands that I believe having an obituary written by an outlet doesn’t automatically mean they pass GNG.
132:
17:
460:
If there was a wealth of information to include about
Shivraj here it should’ve or would’ve been included upon article inception.
331:
300:
683:
43:
249:
229:
187:
98:
93:
154:
102:
579:
85:
506:
Then we have many redlinked biographies from 2017 deaths that are notable and need articles written on them.
207:. Hasn’t progressed passed the one sentence simply stating his profession since the articles July inception.
548:
511:
481:
446:
245:
225:
536:
148:
679:
655:
645:
629:
617:
521:
496:
461:
386:
354:
208:
39:
575:
428:
423:- Actor lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. One obituary does not establish notability.
144:
640:
see no problem with that, and don't understand why anyone else would, since space is not an issue.
180:
660:
649:
634:
621:
604:
583:
552:
532:
526:
515:
501:
485:
466:
450:
432:
409:
391:
377:
359:
342:
317:
291:
274:
253:
233:
213:
67:
194:
544:
507:
477:
442:
310:
32:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
678:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
38:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
641:
613:
600:
405:
373:
338:
270:
592:
350:
204:
424:
287:
491:
58:
160:
89:
353:. That’s the only source on the article, which I pointed out in my own rationale.
119:
543:(which I saw in Google Books as well), we have a clearly notable biography here.
596:
401:
369:
334:
266:
283:
81:
73:
672:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
368:
published his obituary is prima facie evidence of notability.
303:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
222:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
490:
That’s Just flagrantly incorrect. Many entries posted to
115:
111:
107:
179:
595:. If an article is short, please tag it accordingly.
309:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
193:
349:That doesn’t provide anything to support passing
46:). No further edits should be made to this page.
686:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
240:Note: This debate has been included in the
220:Note: This debate has been included in the
242:list of India-related deletion discussions
239:
219:
364:The fact that a prestigious paper like
471:An obituary in the NYT is considered
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
531:It does mean they automatically pas
24:
1:
661:19:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
650:16:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
635:01:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
622:01:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
605:22:19, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
584:03:39, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
553:04:31, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
541:Encyclopedia of Indian Cinema
527:04:25, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
516:04:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
502:04:19, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
486:04:14, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
467:02:24, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
451:02:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
433:03:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
410:15:41, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
392:01:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
378:01:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
360:01:32, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
343:01:24, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
318:00:58, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
292:07:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
280:Encyclopedia of Indian Cinema
275:11:02, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
254:04:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
234:04:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
214:01:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
68:10:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
591:In my web search meets the
703:
327:. Here's his obituary in
675:Please do not modify it.
35:Please do not modify it.
282:mentions him 6 times.
576:John Pack Lambert
320:
256:
246:Shawn in Montreal
236:
226:Shawn in Montreal
66:
694:
677:
657:Rusted AutoParts
631:Rusted AutoParts
523:Rusted AutoParts
498:Rusted AutoParts
463:Rusted AutoParts
388:Rusted AutoParts
356:Rusted AutoParts
315:
308:
306:
304:
210:Rusted AutoParts
198:
197:
183:
135:
123:
105:
65:
63:
56:
37:
702:
701:
697:
696:
695:
693:
692:
691:
690:
684:deletion review
673:
321:
311:
299:
297:
140:
131:
96:
80:
77:
59:
57:
51:The result was
44:deletion review
33:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
700:
698:
689:
688:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
625:
624:
607:
586:
568:
567:
566:
565:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
492:Deaths in 2017
454:
453:
435:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
412:
381:
380:
346:
345:
307:
296:
295:
294:
277:
258:
257:
237:
201:
200:
137:
76:
71:
49:
48:
28:
26:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
699:
687:
685:
681:
676:
670:
669:
662:
659:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
638:
637:
636:
633:
632:
627:
626:
623:
619:
615:
611:
608:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
587:
585:
581:
577:
573:
570:
569:
554:
550:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
529:
528:
525:
524:
519:
518:
517:
513:
509:
505:
504:
503:
500:
499:
493:
489:
488:
487:
483:
479:
474:
470:
469:
468:
465:
464:
458:
457:
456:
455:
452:
448:
444:
439:
436:
434:
430:
426:
422:
419:
418:
411:
407:
403:
398:
395:
394:
393:
390:
389:
383:
382:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
362:
361:
358:
357:
352:
348:
347:
344:
340:
336:
332:
330:
326:
323:
322:
319:
316:
314:
305:
302:
293:
289:
285:
281:
278:
276:
272:
268:
263:
260:
259:
255:
251:
247:
243:
238:
235:
231:
227:
223:
218:
217:
216:
215:
212:
211:
206:
196:
192:
189:
186:
182:
178:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
146:
143:
142:Find sources:
138:
134:
130:
127:
121:
117:
113:
109:
104:
100:
95:
91:
87:
83:
79:
78:
75:
72:
70:
69:
64:
62:
54:
47:
45:
41:
36:
30:
29:
27:
19:
674:
671:
656:
630:
609:
588:
571:
545:TonyBallioni
540:
537:WP:NPOSSIBLE
522:
508:TonyBallioni
497:
478:TonyBallioni
472:
462:
443:TonyBallioni
437:
420:
396:
387:
365:
355:
328:
324:
313:CAPTAIN RAJU
312:
298:
279:
261:
209:
202:
190:
184:
176:
169:
163:
157:
151:
141:
128:
60:
53:no consensus
52:
50:
34:
31:
25:
642:Eustachiusz
614:Eustachiusz
325:Strong keep
167:free images
425:Meatsgains
61:Sandstein
680:talk page
533:WP:ANYBIO
397:The Hindu
366:The Hindu
329:The Hindu
40:talk page
682:or in a
473:de facto
301:Relisted
126:View log
42:or in a
173:WPÂ refs
161:scholar
99:protect
94:history
82:Shivraj
74:Shivraj
597:gidonb
593:WP:GNG
572:Delete
421:Delete
402:Pburka
370:Pburka
351:WP:GNG
335:Pburka
267:Vorbee
262:Delete
205:WP:GNG
203:Fails
145:Google
103:delete
284:Xx236
188:JSTOR
149:books
133:Stats
120:views
112:watch
108:links
16:<
646:talk
618:talk
610:Keep
601:talk
589:Keep
580:talk
549:talk
512:talk
482:talk
447:talk
438:Keep
429:talk
406:talk
374:talk
339:talk
288:talk
271:talk
250:talk
230:talk
181:FENS
155:news
116:logs
90:talk
86:edit
195:TWL
124:– (
648:)
620:)
603:)
582:)
551:)
514:)
484:)
449:)
431:)
408:)
376:)
341:)
333:.
290:)
273:)
252:)
244:.
232:)
224:.
175:)
118:|
114:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
55:.
644:(
616:(
599:(
578:(
547:(
510:(
480:(
445:(
427:(
404:(
372:(
337:(
286:(
269:(
248:(
228:(
199:)
191:·
185:·
177:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
147:(
139:(
136:)
129:·
122:)
84:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.