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 snow delete.
Geschichte (
talk) 11:43, 18 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Badly sourced BLP. Subtle
WP:ADMASQ entirely supported by sources controlled by Kaushik himself with no evidence of notability as a singer (per
WP:NMUSICIAN), businessperson, filmmaker (per
WP:CREATIVE), cricketer (per
WP:NCRIC) or anything else really. Fails all relevant criteria and a
WP:BEFORE search yielded nothing. The tag says "some of the article's listed sources may not be reliable" but, in my view, none of them are.
This has already been sent to draft once and contested by the creator. Moving this back to draft would be move warring. The article should be deleted. Source analysis to follow.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)reply
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.
Delete Per the excellent in-depth source assessment by Spiderone, fails
WP:GNG and
WP:ANYBIO.
Theroadislong (
talk) 19:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)reply
DeleteSpiderone were kind enough to present such an elaborate assessment. It is clear that it doesn't qualify for any notability guidelines.
Nomadicghumakkad (
talk) 01:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. I think this is the most impressive case for deletion that I've yet seen. Well done,
Spiderone.
No Great Shaker (
talk) 09:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Comment the nominated article has had a number of messy cross-namespace moves, so I have put a move protect on it for a month. I originally couldn't even find the article in question when I saw this nomination.
Harrias(he/him) •talk 10:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: Blatantly promotional article with self-published primary sources, junk sources and the best sources are mere passing mentions. Ravensfire (
talk) 00:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete Patrolling CSD categories and expiring drafts, I see dozens of articles like this every day. I'm surprised it got as far as an AFD. LizRead!Talk! 02:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete clear-cut WP:BIO/GNG fail.
Spiderone is your err spidey sense tingling at the section of your Talk the editor used? Deletation is new, but repeated asking for "tag" removal. StarMississippi 22:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Star Mississippi that editor definitely isn't new, sadly. I do sometimes wish that they'd take a day off so that the rest of us can get on with building an encyclopaedia.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 22:26, 15 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Delete: No qualifying source in article, as shown by Spiderone, and I found nothing on Google too. Fails
WP:BIO. JavaHurricane 10:11, 16 September 2021 (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.