- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 00:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Romaisa Khan
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Romaisa Khan ( | 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)
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, etc. Merely being in a film or TV series does not make one Inherently notable. Created by a sockpuppet — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 11:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 11:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Internet. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. In addition to the citations to articles focused on Khan published through nation-wide Pakistani news outlets that are currently cited in the article, I also saw coverage and analysis of her influence in
an article from the European Journal of Management and Business Economics (DOI:10.1108/EJMBE-08-2022-0270).
Hydrangeans (
she/her |
talk |
edits) 23:57, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Let's evaluate each and every reference cited in the BLP.
- Daily Pakistan WP:PROMO/tabloid journalism, Daily Pakistan is not reliable for establishing WP:N.
- ARY News The "web desk" byline doesn't meet reliability criteria for news organizations in Pakistan.
- 24 News HD Such sensational interviews aren't sufficient for establishing WP:N.
- Al Jazeera Acceptable source, but this source alone doesn't establish WP:N, No significant/in-depth coverage.
- Urdu Point Not a WP:RS according to criteria for news organizations in Pakistan.
- Oyeyeah - Clearly unreliable and unacceptable source
- The Nation Acceptable source but it only verifies role. No significant/in-depth coverage.
- Mag The Weekly Questionable source but also only verifies role. No significant/in-depth coverage.
- Daily Pakistan Only verifies role, Daily Pakistan is not reliable for establishing WP:N.
- Dawn Images WP:RS but only confirms receipt of a non-notable award
- — Saqib ( talk | contribs) 00:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Let's evaluate each and every reference cited in the BLP.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:14, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- 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.