Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers

WP:DSACTOR

All deletion discussions relating to filmmakers, directors and other non-actor film-related people should now be listed on this page.

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Actors and filmmakers. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Actors and filmmakers|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Actors and filmmakers. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Scan for actor AfDs

Scan for filmmaker AfDs

Actors and filmmakers

Mark Luz

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was originally a WP:PROD, with me stating "Unnotable WP:NACTOR which has been mostly unreferenced for years." This was then deprodded by Kvng who then said "consider addressing Template:Pinoy Big Brother contents comprehensively". I don't exactly know what he means by this, but if the argument that he is primarily known as Big Brother contestant, then this falls into WP:NBIO (as we don't have a reality TV-specific policy, unless WP:ARTIST comes into play), and this will just be a rehashing of the Big Brother content and would just give WP:UNDUE weight on a non-BLP activities of a biography. As stated on PROD, this has been unreferenced for years, considering the 2 references used fail WP:GNG. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Philippines. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacks significant coverage in mentioned references and all the roles he had played was special appearance or guest only rather than significant role or main. Fade258 (talk) 12:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Hernandez

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

nonnotable actor --Altenmann >talk 14:09, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and California. Shellwood (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:13, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jared Safier

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested disinfected BLAR; a before search shows only non-RSs and 'meet Courtney Stodden's husband'-style articles. Laun chba ller 16:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I invited the community to fix up the article at WP:CLEANUP a year ago, but nothing constructive could be done. Except for the wedding stories, none of the sources are about the subject matter. In fact, before the nominator removed most or the content, it was almost all about what collaborators had achieved elsewhere. BOTTO_(T•C) 16:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:11, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abhimanyu Shammi Thilakan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage and most sources are non-bylined churnalism, mentions, or otherwise unreliable. Previously deleted A7 and G11 under Abhimanyu S Thilakan. CNMall41 (talk) 04:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 04:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Marco (2024 film): Appears to fail GNG. Also WP:TOOSOON for NACTOR. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arun Pradeep

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. No significant coverage. CNMall41 (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sudip Pandey

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is may not notable according to WP:NACTOR and does not meet the requirements for WP:SIG in reliable, independent sources. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Film, Asia, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep despite the earlier deletion. The coverage of his death seems to just barely qualify him. Pinging Zuck28 who added Pandey to the List of Bhojpuri actors in January. TheDeafWikipedian (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the nominator has a very low understanding of the Wikipedia guidelines. They’re just nominating random articles created by me as an act of retaliation because I nominated a few of the articles they created about non-notable subjects. Their rationale for the AFD is unclear as, why they believe it should be deleted, anyways I leave this matter for fellow editors.

Thank you for pinging me.

Zuck28 (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yogesh Tripathi

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable actor. Fails Wp:GNG and WP:NACTOR. No lead roles no significant coverage in reliable sources. Zuck28 (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Television, India, and Uttar Pradesh. Zuck28 (talk) 17:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:This article is notable according to Wikipedia’s notability guidelines such as WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 19:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus Kherkatary

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Jesus Kherkatary

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies of living persons (WP:BIO). There is no significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. The references provided are mostly self-published or unverifiable (such as IMDb, Instagram, FilmFreeway). There are no news articles or third-party sources that establish the subject's notability. The content appears promotional and fails the general notability guideline (WP:GNG). Therefore, deletion is proposed. Akash Boro (talk) 09:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 June 11. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:35, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have corrected the formatting and naming of this nomination. No opinion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Theatre, and India. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:54, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Lack of wp:SIGCOV. Just a single source is available. Zuck28 (talk) 18:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Kimmelman

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotion for non notable filmmaker. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Laundry list of awards are not major. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:46, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and New York. Shellwood (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of this article, I respectfully disagree with the assertion that international awards are not significant. The Cannes Film Festival, in particular, is an industry benchmark. Emmy awards are notable as well. The international honors Ken Kimmelman's films have received reflect the high regard in which his work is held. Meanwhile, I see that 1) the article needs updating; 2) I'm happy to add more reliable sources to support the notability of this filmmaker; 3) there are too many awards, and they are listed chronologically, which makes it difficult to distinguish the most significant, so I will revise, edit and update.Trouver (talk)

Delete per WP:SOAP, WP:COAT, WP:SPAM, and WP:MILL. We are not a soap box, and this page slips in advocacy for aesthetic realism with unnecessarily large number of references to the same. It's spam masquerading as references. Getting into Cannes Film Festival Short Film Corner is surprisingly easy: my partner got in with a film produced with less than 5 figures. As the wealthiest man in the world is out to ruin us financially, we don't need to stray from our very limited charitable mission into advocating other world views. Bearian (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Chozick

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable filmmaker / actor. No notable productions as filmmaker. No good roles for NACTOR. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. A few lines in Variety is not enough. Awards are not major. Just showing at festivals is not notable. Sockfarm creation. Prod removed cause it's apparently Anglocentric to nominated an article on an Anglo for deletion. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:00, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Japan, and Connecticut. Shellwood (talk) 11:09, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: On one hand, I hate sock farms, but on the other hand, he didn't merely show up but won something. I'm always "torn" about how to !vote in such situations. Discuss. Bearian (talk) 18:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cat Roberts

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Primary sourced promotion for non notableacademic / actress. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. No good roles for nactor. Award is not major. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:04, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Arizona. Shellwood (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Arguably notable as a scholar. What do folks think? Bearian (talk) 18:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be her most likely claim to notability. Some decent citation numbers but also down in a cast of many for the best of them. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:29, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Even if she is notable as a scholar, the entire article is about her acting (which I will not evaluate). DaffodilOcean (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lakshya Chawla

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable photographer. Sources consist of passing mentions, spammy advertorials, or self-published material. Not a single reliable source provides WP:SIGCOV on the subject. See also WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Noteworthy that two different SPAs have removed the COI template on this article. Yuvaank (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Photography, and India. Yuvaank (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Punjab. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable photographer, Citations consist in this article are enough to demonstrate notability of the subject. Meets WP:BASIC. [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5].CresiaBilli (talk) 13:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CresiaBilli: Can you fix your link by adding https:// before www.? Thanks Agletarang (talk) 15:26, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Nothing in-depth about he subject in reliable sources. The references provided by CresiaBilli demonstrate why WP:NEWSORGINDIA exists. Three of the four are churnalism (same topic, same photograph, and almost the same date). Clear press campaign to promote the subject which is also being attempted with Wikipedia based on the edit history. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The individual clearly does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Wikipedia isn't a platform for showcasing personal career achievements or work portfolio like a resume WP:NOTCV. Charlie (talk) 05:23, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: meets WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE through significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources over several years. A dedicated profile in the 2019 Bloomsbury book Young India: The Heroes of Today^[1] provides in-depth coverage, while feature articles in The Asian Age (2019), Times Now Hindi (2024)^[2], and DNA India (2025)^[3] focus on his career. HuffPost (2015)^[4], The Indian Express (2015, 2017)^[5]^[6], Vogue India (2022)^[7], and The Wire (2025)^[8] cover his notable projects and industry impact. The 2017 WeddingSutra award nomination further supports recognition. While Times Now Hindi and DNA India may raise churnalism concerns, their focus on Chawla’s career, combined with Yuva Bharat, Vogue India, and others, shows sustained, independent interest. I agree weak sources (e.g., TOI Mediawire) should be removed and am revising the article to remove resume-like language (e.g., CAT score) for neutrality. Cleanup, not deletion, is warranted.KKM2025 (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Thorp Lundahl

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Purely WP:PROMO and resume-like. Amigao (talk) 15:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Journalism. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:19, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No WP:SIGCOV. Fancy Refrigerator ^(talk) 00:56, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been augmented and expanded to include personal and family information speciifically related to Robert Lundahl's public and well vetted fimmaking. There are 54 citations, many from news outlets including the LA Times, KCET, Cascade PBS, Salem-News.com, East County Magazine (7 million readers). His films have aired nationally in over 80 cities on PBS stations, distributed by Zeiden Media. He has received an Northern California Emmy® Award and have been vetted also by and may be referred via IMDb (Internet Movie Database), and Bullfrog Films. His radio documentaries may be heard weekly on KPFK Los Angeles, tackling Southern California Environmental Justice issues and water controversies. He has worked with Native American leadership including Mojave Hereditary Chief Reverend Ron Van Fleet, Chemehuevi Hereditary Chief, Matthew Leivas, Sr., UFW United Farm Worker and La Cuna de Aztlan Chicano leader Alfredo Acosta Figueroa (Yaqui/Chemehuevi) relative of Joaquin Murrietta, Jose Maria Figueroa, (Figueroa Boulevard), Governor of Alta California, who freed Native, Indigenous people from the Mission system that enslaved them, Viejas Kumeyaay Chairman Anthony Pico, relative of California's first Governor Pio Pico (Pico Boulevard) and Native American activist and linguist Adekine Smith (Klallam). Lundahl's research and the importance of his films is exceptional and necessary to our collective understanding of a relavant history today as immigration "crackdowns" and fedral assaults roil our cities.

Please remove the nomination to delete. Thank you! CottonsPoint (talk) 17:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adeline Smith (see Wikipedia) Misspelled above CottonsPoint (talk) 17:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. CottonsPoint needs to read WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:V and then take the article through WP:Articles for creation. The article is simply not up to Wikipedia's standards. I honestly cannot determine whether the topic is notable as this is, today. Lamona (talk) 02:57, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's much misunderstaning about the Native Indigenous experience. There is a tendency to expect to "Westernize" it. There is a lack of familiarity with key individuals, it's literally and metaphorically another world from the American consciousness. Ludahl, I think he would say by invitation through friendship was placed in a position of being Executive Directof of a Native 502 (c) 3 in the state of Washington, under the Direction of President Linda Wiechman (Elwha Klallam) which led him to take action on behalf of the Klallam Community to address an act of desecration of tribal canoes laid up on the beach out front of the Red Lion Inn in Port Angeles. By agreemment with tribal mambers, aka friends, Song on the Water, the film was made as a collaboration. That film the second, following Unconquering the Last Frontier, was made possible because Lundahl had worked closely with Klallam elders Beatrrice Charles and Adeline Smith. powerful women who had testified in the Boaldt Decision (Think Fish Wars, Marlon Brando, Sasheen Littlefeather,) ect in addressing American genocide documented in his films.

He is the recipient of the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Coast Salish Tulalip Tribes Film Festival, for that reason. Editing will continue to add the above. Respectfully, thank you for your comment, "I honestly cannot determine whether the topic is notable as this is, today." We believe you. It may be a matter of experience and exposure with this difficult subject. However that does not mean the subject of the article is not "notable," whatever that means in a Western context. It also does not mean it should be "Deleted" which reads like a similaar act of violence against Native people. Best to try to enlarge your mind across barriiers of culture which have resulted in so much pain and destruction of people and the environment important to us all. Gratefully for your better understanding.

Hoyt,

Cottons Point CottonsPoint (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See https://www.reddit.com/r/wikipediaafdwatch/comments/1l6etko/wikipediaarticles_for_deletionrobert_thorp_lundahl/ CottonsPoint (talk) 00:56, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changes made CottonsPoint (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your arguments here have nothing to do with the problems with the article. Wikipedia articles all follow a particular style and follow a series of policies that are designed to guarantee a consistent level of quality in the article itself. This article follows none of those policies. It is quite possible that once it does there will be no question about notability, but as it is today it does not fit into the Wikipedia style. If you haven't familiarized yourself with the pages I suggested, then you are unlikely to create a successful article. It does appear that this is the only article you have worked on. New editors are encouraged to take their first articles through AfC as a way to get help with learning the Wikipedia style. It's that simple. Lamona (talk) 02:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drafity. I lean towards this meeting WP:GNG but it is absolutely not (yet) ready for mainspace. — tony ^talk 01:05, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stacy Jefferson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources. Only external link is IMDb. User:Tankishguy talk :) say hi 21:00, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. User:Tankishguy talk :) say hi 21:00, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Comics and animation, Anime and manga, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It might be worth noting that the article title probably should be Stacey Gregg (the page with that name has been deleted a few times previously). Don't think she was ever known as Stacy (without the e). She was also known for roles in the US as Stacey Maxwell, eg in The Virginian, The Monkees and Batman. In the UK she's known for roles in Crossroads https://www.newspapers.com/image/893742133 and playing Sandy in Grease alongside Richard Gere eg https://www.newspapers.com/image/840906998 There's a few more hits at https://www.newspapers.com/search/results/?keyword=%22Stacey+Gregg%22++&region=gb-eng worth checking the British Newspaper Archive as well, see also this two-page articles from the TV Times in 1971 (page 8-9) https://mcmweb.co.uk/tvtimes/1971/Nov%206th%201971.pdf Piecesofuk (talk) 08:54, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guil Lunde

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per LastJabberwocky's prod: "Lacks SIGCOV in independent sources." Reywas92^Talk 16:27, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No sourcing to be found for this person. The Dubbing Wikia is about the best that comes up in Gsearch... One source used in the article that isn't linked to a book online, so I can't check. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kalani Hilliker

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG, appears to be famous for being famous, but a WP:ROTM actor, dancer. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 09:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Women, and United States of America. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 09:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:18, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as it lacks significant coverage in reliable and independent references to the subject and some of the references is self-published source and unreliable. Fade258 (talk) 13:04, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aina Asif

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Speedy decline. Last deletion end of 2024 and nothing has happened since that time to show notability. Sources are promotional, non-bylined (similar to WP:NEWSORGINDIA, or otherwise reliable. CNMall41 (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and Pakistan. CNMall41 (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging previous voters @Wikibear47:, @Star Mississippi:, @Mushy Yank:, @Saqib:, @GrabUp: --CNMall41 (talk) 02:00, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
acknowledging the ping, and thanks @CNMall41

Unfortunately I do not have the on wiki time to do sufficient research to cast an opinion here and don't anticipate that changing in the next week. Will weigh in if I can and appreciate the heads up. Star Mississippi 01:11, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)m[reply]

Keep. Aina Asif meets WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR based on new coverage since the 2024 deletion. Her lead roles in Mayi Ri, Pinjra and Judwaa have received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources like The Express Tribune and The News International. The article has been rewritten with a neutral tone and now includes bylined, non-promotional references that address the original deletion rationale. As creater, i have of the article written the article in neutral tone. Behappyyar (talk) 10:58, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point out said sources? I find a few bylined articles that verify a role, but nothing about her. WP:NACTOR is not guaranteed for having roles as there is NO inherent notability.--CNMall41 (talk) 15:23, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NACTOR clear says The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. There is significant sources about her acting in notable dramas. Behappyyar (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please quote the entire thread as it is misleading not to do so - "Such a person may be considered notable if:" (my emphasis added). So....notability is not inherent here. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41: Thank you for the clarification. I understand WP:NACTOR is not automatic notability. However, Aina Asif has received significant coverage in major Pakistani media outlets — not just for her roles, but for her rising status in the industry.

For example:

The Express Tribune published a feature on her Mayi Ri role and social impact: https://tribune.com.pk/story/2434576/mayi-ri-is-a-step-in-the-right-direction
The News International highlighted her performance in Pinjra in an article discussing child-centric storytelling: https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/1002289-raising-questions
Reviews and interviews on platforms like Galaxy Lollywood and Dawn Images also cover her work in detail.

These are independent, bylined, and show non-trivial coverage, meeting the threshold for WP:GNG . I’m happy to continue improving the article if you feel more sourcing or clarification is needed.

Behappyyar (talk) 08:43, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The links you provided are either broken or lead to the homepage so I cannot review. Reviews and interviews are not considered significant for purposes of establishing notability. Interviews are not independent and the reviews must be of the actor, not just mentioning the actor with a review of the work. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the error. Here you go

[6] as rising star, [7] as a cast, [8] for his early drama roles, [9] for her controversy. Behappyyar (talk) 17:15, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Ref 1 - Intervew, Ref 2 through Ref 4 - unbylined paid-for and/or churnalism which is the same as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. None of this can be used. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete: Not even remotely notable. This article has been deleted twice yet somehow different users mange to restore the same version again and again. Clearly fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Just because someone acted in two more drama serials doesn't mean that they are now notable. Wikibear47 (talk) 22:33, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikibear47: I understand your concern about repeated recreations. However, this is not a re-post of the previously deleted versions. The article has been significantly improved with 'reliable, secondary, and bylined sources'. It now documents Aina Asif's lead roles in critically discussed serials like Mayi Ri, Pinjra, and Judwaa, with extensive media coverage that was not available at the time of earlier deletions.

The current version avoids promotional tone, uses a neutral narrative, and cites national publications like The News, Express Tribune, and Dawn. This supports a claim of notability under WP:GNG and shows growth since her earlier career stage.

I'm open to feedback and improvements but believe this version no longer qualifies for speedy deletion or a G4 tag.

Behappyyar (talk) 08:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When referring to the current version, how do you know what the deleted version looks(ed) like?--CNMall41 (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am referring to the references—because when the page was deleted, those references weren’t available at that time. Behappyyar (talk) 17:05, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think it meets WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Moondragon21 (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to show the sources that support either?--CNMall41 (talk) 15:53, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. There is some coverage from reliable sources that establish notability.

Dualpendel (talk) 18:10, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask what I have been asking everyone (which still has not been answered with the exception of one use providing unreliable sources)......what "coverage from reliable sources" are you referring to that "establish notability?" Note WP:ATA. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:15, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 Sorry, I was being lazy before.

Radhakrishnan, Manjusha (2025-03-04). "All about Pakistani drama Judwaa starring Aina Asif". Gulf News: [1] Khan, Asif. "Aina Asif: a rising star". www.thenews.com.pk. Archived from the original on 2025-06-06. Retrieved 2025-06-02.

This was incorrectly cited, so I have fixed it. It is a reasonably sized interview with the subject in a national newspaper, reliable source.

[3] "Aina Asif clocks four 'incredible years' of acting with gratitude note". jang.com.pk. 2024-11-18. Retrieved 2025-06-02.

Another important national newspaper, minor article about the subject.

[11] "Tuba and Aina Asif reunite". Daily Times. 2023-09-15. Retrieved 2025-06-02.

This is a space filler but in a minor national newspaper.

Then we have 2 articles in the Middle East press about the series, but do mention Aina Asif as a star of the serial.

[6] "'Highest form of abuse': Pakistani drama 'Mayi Ri' shines light on child marriage and beyond". Arab News. 2023-08-02. Retrieved 2025-06-02.

[13] Radhakrishnan, Manjusha (2025-03-04). "All about Pakistani drama Judwaa starring Aina Asif". Gulf News:

Further the subject has 4 notable series ( Hum Tum , Pinjra , Baby Baji & Mayi Ri ) credited to her in the article, that alone justifies notability.

Dualpendel (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1) this is an interview, not independent. 3) Unbylined churnalism crap (similar to WP:NEWSORGINDIA. 6) She is listed in the caption of an image in the article, nothing in the article itself about her. 11) Another ubylined article which is basically a short about something she said on Instagram. 13) Interview, again not independent, and only mentions her as having the role - nothing "about" her so just verification. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I currently have no thoughts about this, but considering that this AfD will be relisted soon rather than being closed as keep/delete, I will leave some thoughts on this topic. Pakistani-based outlets often have dubious reputations as sources to be used on Wikipedia so I might !vote soon if time allows, but there is a number of sources here that could interest some users. But I suspect that these sources would fall under the "no byline, promotional, mentions, unreliable etc..." category. ToadetteEdit (talk) 08:27, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ToadetteEdit:, You are correct about the sourcing. I looked at a lot of these before giving up as you can see here and here that the bylines and promotional tone would fall under the same policy as WP:NEWSORGINDIA which I would argue applies to the entire subcontinent, not just a country. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:24, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that was what I expect the sources to come up with. I am concerned though with the two WP:ITSNOTABLE !vote from some random users. The sourcing brought up by the first user speaks for itself; the sources often look exactly the same as the other "byline" articles as you claim. I am not am expert in determining the validation of the Indian/Pakistani sources, as they tend to masquerade promotion into their own articles. I will probably make my last decision tomorrow. ToadetteEdit (talk) 19:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Multiple significant roles in notable films and enough media coverage is available as sources. Zuck28 (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NACTOR says "may" be notable. Having multiple roles does grant inherent notability. As far as sources, many have already been discussed. Can you point out which sources (outside NEWSORGINDIA) that would show notability under GNG?--CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some more media coverage which, I found with a simple Google search.

1 2, 3, 4, 5. Zuck28 (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Aina Asif plays significant roles in many notable television shows. Also this actress is famous and meeting WP:GNG. Deriu And (talk) 18:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ashton Leigh

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR with no major roles. First billing in Frankenstein vs. The Mummy isn't going to do it. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Louisiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:27, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Zero coverage for an actor with this name, hits on anyone with this name. Largely unsourced article, with nothing we can use. No coverage, not notable. Oaktree b (talk) 22:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the only film he's ever starred in. Bearian (talk) 23:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She. But redirecting to Frankenstein vs. The Mummy#Cast ("especially Ashton Leigh who brings a lot of energy and sincerity to the part of the young archeologist" says one review) might be a good idea (she has 107 credits listed on her IMDb profile; 71 on TV Guide; most are minor roles but some could count for notability: Gothic Harvest, Big Shark, for example?). Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 08:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Madigan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBIO. IMDb and interviews do not establish notability. GTrang (talk) 01:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:01, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He directed Fight or Flight, a notable film that received independent coverage. WP:DIRECTOR, a notability guideline, indicates that "This guideline applies to authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals. Such a person is notable if: [...]The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series". The page can therefore be kept per the guideline.--Artus Sauerfog Dark-Eon (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:47, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joni Ayton-Kent

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A young actor making her way on stage and in film, but yet to break through with starring roles in major productions. There are many citations, but these support the a play or film, and Ayton-Kent isn't the focus of them. WP:TOOSOON. Klbrain (talk) 21:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:44, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:44, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Enough good roles for NACTOR. As Jo Eaton-Kent they had a significant role in The Watch ("But Eaton-Kent is excellent and the character works on their own terms." Lloyd, Robert (5 January 2021), "The colorful world of 'The Watch'", Los Angeles Times) and in Don't Forget the Driver [10]. Also on stage in A Christmas Carol: A Ghost Story [11] (As Joni Ayton-Kent in the televised version [12]). On stage Treasure Island panto got multiple reviews ("Although every character’s performance was terrific, Joni Ayton-Kent's performance of four characters stood out for me." Lloyd, Robert (7 December 2022), "Hall for Cornwall's Christmas pantomime Treasure Island is 'ansome!", Falmouth Packet. "while Joni Ayton-Kent is an inspired (and quietly revolutionary) choice for the joint female leads of Billie Bones and Benji Gunn, getting the crowd involved with some lung-busting Freddie Mercury-inspired 'day-ohs'." Trewhela, Lee (12 December 2022), "Treasure Island - the panto that's still not quite a panto with Cornwall as its star - When In The Ghetto is rewritten as In The Kernow, you know you're in panto land", CornwallLive.) Prince also got multiple reviews (Iftikhar, Asyia (21 September 2022), "The Prince review: Abigail Thorn's debut play reinvents Shakespeare with a queer, trans twist", Pink News. Gaian, Kestral (20 September 2022), "The Prince review; Abigail Thorn's wonderful debut as playwright", Trans Writes. Marcolina, Cindy (20 September 2022), "Review: THE PRINCE, Southwark Playhouse", Broadway World.) The Welsh debut of Revolt. She Said. Revolt Again. aslo got coverage and they played a major role. duffbeerforme (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the complete analysis by duffbeerforme is correct. Here is my counter analysis: [13]-This is not even the passing mentions. You can not find her name. [14] - Again i am unable to find her name here. [15]- This is only credit of minor role, no in-depth coverage. [16]-She played a minor role among four characters, No Independent. [17] - A minor role in the same play 'Treasure Island'. [18] - This is the review of a play where she has a minor role. Not a reliable source. [19]- Again this is the review of a play where she has not major role. [20] - Review of the same play 'The Prince' not reliable, no in-depth.CresiaBilli (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start with your first claim of RadioTimes, "You can not find her name." Quote from the source: "Where have I seen Jo Eaton-Kent before? Don't Forget The Driver is Jo Eaton-Kent's first major onscreen role, after a walk-on part in The Romanoffs. They are also due to star alongside Anne-Marie Duff and Arthur Darvill in Sweet Charity at the Donmar Warehouse". There is two mentions of their name it that quote alone. It says their role in that show is "major". Second, Standard, you claim again unable to find name. Quote: "I’ve seen countless stage adaptations of the novel but don’t think I’ve ever heard the lovely Dickensian words spoken here by Jo Eaton-Kent’s Ghost of Christmas Past:". There is their name. Third, BBC, verifies their role (credited to that name) as the Ghost of Christmas Past, a role that I would argue is significant. Four and Five, Treasure Island. How is The Packets review "No independent"? How do you justify saying a minor role when sourcing says they played four roles. Both reviewers thought they were important enough to discuss (and single out for praise) plus at least two of the characters they played are considered major characters in the source material (Billy Bones and Ben Gunn). Six, how is Pink News not a reliable source? Reading the review it seems like a significant supporting role. Seven and Eight. With six that's three reviews of a play (which would make it notable) where they play a significant supporting role (does not need to be The main role). Regardless of your personal opinion on the stage roles they still have multiple significant screen roles, The Watch and Don't Forget the Driver. Which is good for NACTOR. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, she is also now starring in the European production of Hadestown at the Royal Theater Carré in Amsterdam, which just appeared on the Eva Jinek talk show on Dutch television channel NPO 1. Campvamp69 (talk) 21:04, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could we please get an analysis of duffbeerforme's sources from someone who is not closely connected to the subject?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 22:38, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:32, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom this topic is WP:TOOSOON. Fails WP:GNG. CresiaBilli (talk) 08:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per duffbeerforme as subject has enough discussion in independent secondary reliable sources of her roles in multiple stage performances and shows to meet WP:NACTOR #1 although not GNG. Nnev66 (talk) 18:49, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I think the argument is laid out pretty clearly by the commenters above. I think it's WP:TOOSOON for this person. Yes, she is working professionally, but I don't see anything really notable -- no Olivier Award nominations, etc. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ssilvers, If you mean the analysis by CresiaBilli then could you revisit as their analysis is straight out wrong in parts. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:34, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I mean yours and theirs, as well as my own analysis of her career and the sources. If you see significant coverage, then you should amend the article to set forth clearly in the narrative facts reflecting that coverage, as well as facts about her career that show all her Tony and Olivier awards, starring roles in West End productions, etc. It appears that her only appearance in the West End was a 2-night concert in the relatively minor role of Elena in If/Then. It is very clear that her film career is trivial. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NACTOR does not require Tony and Olivier awards or West End productions. duffbeerforme (talk) 02:03, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NACTOR requires:

1. The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or

2. The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Based on what the article says, she has not had significant roles in any notable stage performances or films. Her film roles have been trivial, and her significant roles have been in less notable stage productions rather than in, say, long-running West End productions. She has certainly not made any unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Now, please stop WP:BLUDGEONing this discussion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:30, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NACTOR requires:

1. The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or

Funny how you keep missing one out. duffbeerforme (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how you keep failing to add it to the narrative discussion in her article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TV shows are in the Filmography table and The Watch (TV series) is noted in the body of the article. Nnev66 (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gwen (singer)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BANDMEMBER, no indication of notability outside of being in her group. orangesclub 🍊 00:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Music, and Philippines. orangesclub 🍊 00:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Television. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:35, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per my argument to Maloi ROY is WAR Talk! 22:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bini (group): Per my arguments at the Maloi AFD discussion. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 18:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think "Gwen (singer)" is an appropriate redirect. There may have been several more notable singers named Gwen that are for more notable. Either this is kept (either as a standalone article or as a redirect assuming info on this article is not there at the main Bini article) or deleted, no redirects. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Second choice is to list this person under Gwen (given name), then redirect Gwen (singer) to Gwen (given name) or have it deleted altogether (will consider WP:RFD on this at a later time). Howard the Duck (talk) 23:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She is passed in WP:GNG given to Maloi as demonstrated the significant coverage of Vogue Philippines and it is technically outside of Bini. She's also a housemate of Pinoy Big Brother: Otso and have importance on that, given to that in the Gwen (singer) § Media image as it is really passed in GNG. This is like a similar of WP:IDONTLIKEIT you just overlooked that her Media image section is obviously have somehow passed in WP:GNG. This is might be another relisting week.ROY is WAR Talk! 00:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I love how you use the word "technically" to further emphasize it is indeed connected to Bini (LOL).

We don't create articles on contestants of reality TV shows aolely based on their participation on said shows, either, so I dont know why you'd bring that up. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am explaining to you that she is passed on WP:GNG together with WP:SIGCOV stating all her featured notable prestigious magazines like Parcinq, Billboard Philippines, and Vogue Philippines. All of them are demonstrating the significant coverage and in-depth on her fashion. You are trying to gaslight the facts and my arguments that she is notable at all. And besides, I noticed that you participating only when have a AfD (not a assumption but a observation) on Maloi and Gwen and given it is a WP:IDONTLIKEIT and SIGCOV is the major criteria of GNG that's why she's passed.

This is a summary for passing significant coverage of Gwen, for participating this AfD)

Billboard Philippines: Gwen was featured on notable magazine of Billboard Philippines where she talks about her life and being a housemate on Pinoy Big Brother: Otso.
Vogue Philippines: She featured also in this notable magazine with her fashion stating of Vogue writer Bianca Custodio describing her Gwen's fashion "60's mod-inspired" and "the girls take a break from their usual image, donning bobbed wigs of varying shapes and cuts."
Parcinq: Parcinq is a Philippine magazine and Gwen was featured in this magazine as a cover pf the magazine. Gwen also shares on her life on this magazine with Parcinq describes the fashion of Gwen as "Black symbolizes death, darkness, and the mysteries of the universe." ROY is WAR Talk! 01:42, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If these are WP:INTERVIEWs then these are most likely fail WP:RS and therefore fail WP:GNG regardless if such activities make her surpass WP:BANDMEMBER. Howard the Duck (talk) 03:22, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. All of them are passed in WP:RS since it was a reliable and have significant coverage with Gwen's fashion with given sources. ROY is WAR Talk! 05:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly haven't read WP:INTERVIEW? Even if this person was interviewed by the Times of London about her life and career, it would fail WP:RS. Reliable sources, while also considers who published it, considers how it was created. Interviews arw autobiographical.

With being said, Billboard was indeed an interview, while the other two were fashion editorials with an interview interspersed on it. I can figure fashion editorials can be used as WP:RS if somebody else reports on it. All of these are primary and fails WP:RS.

Again, competence is required. If an article is primarily based on interviews, and on ABS-CBN and Youtube, it has no place here. Howard the Duck (talk) 06:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I already read it earlier (LOL). It is clearly passed in WP:RS it is notable magazines like Vogue Philippines and Billboard Philippines they have high credibility on this magazine or company so it is a reliable source and passed on WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV . They are not a "cheap" magazines whatsoever and they are Professionally edited publications, and independent. It is not merely trivial or promotional, it also applied on WP:NBASIC which is passed also. It really matters who publishes it, is it unreliable or not? In this case, Billboard and Vogue and Parcinq are reliable (highly on Billboard and Vogue since they are the top reliable). Also, it is not a uncontroversial claims. The interview are usually primary sources, but when conducted and published by reliable third party sources with highly reputable source, they are acceptable.

Again, this is my last argument on this and it is clearly will go over and over on this, and obviously clearly mentioning ABS-CBN and YouTube, Vogue Billboard PH and ABS-CBN, YouTube are different (LOL). ROY is WAR Talk! 07:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not if the source is cheap or not (hence the Times of London analogy); it's whether or not the source is the subject herself. You clearly haven't read WP:INTERVIEW. The closing admin should take notice of willful ignorance of the arguments being presented to you. I guess we won't need another relist. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:39, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:INTERVIEW § Who, what, where Is this a reliable source such as a broadsheet newspaper, respected magazine, reliable broadcaster or news outlet that specializes in interviews? In this case, Billboard PH, Vogue Philippines and Parcinq are reliable.

Also on WP:INTERVIEW, independent or non-independent of the subject matter, it is clearly demonstrate that Billboard PH and Vogue Philippines are independent, this is a most likely a WP: IDONTLIKEIT argument, I gave you all my arguments but you insisting that Billboard and Vogue are not reliable. The issue of "willful ignorance" as might be a attacking me. Is that there's no policy basis for excluding a well sourced, editorially controlled interview published by an RS from notability consideration. This is not applied to Gwen, this is all applied to all musicians also that interview like New York Times, Original Billboard and Original Vogue if you exclude that, half of WP:BIO wouldn't exist. ROY is WAR Talk! 07:48, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter if it's from the Times of London, Vogue Italia, Billboard USA, or Yes Magazine; WP:INTERVIEW#Independence states "The interviewee may or may not be independent of the subject matter. In some cases, the interviewer is also not independent. For example:

Alice Expert talks about herself, her actions, or her ideas: non-independent source."

In other words, a person talking about oneself in any publication or medium (print, TV, internet) fails WP:RS. As per WP:INTERVIEW#Notability: "Anything interviewees say about themselves or their own work is both primary and non-independent, and therefore does not support a claim for notability."

Now, you could argue there may had been some synthesis on those three articles, but if we're really basing the notability of this person, aside from being a WP:BANDMEMBER, it'll take more than these sources. Howard the Duck (talk) 09:20, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Although, somehow are accurate but it doesn't mean you cannot use it. The interviewee may or may not be independent of the subject matter. In some cases, the interviewer is also not independent. this applies to the statement made by the subject, not the entire interview article.

On WP:INTERVIEW: It is okay to use interviews to source some facts. Interviews may sometimes be the best or clearest sources, especially for biographical or personal information and as I said it is clearly independent, have significant coverage, and reliable since it was editorially controlled. and Billboard Philippines and Vogue Philippines are the one who interviewed the subject and it is not a conflict of interest. Independent sources are more generally reliable than sources that have a conflict of interest or are otherwise involved in the subject. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:02, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To explain further, "source" in interview is the interviewee (the one being interviewed), not the one doing the interview (the journalist in behalf of the publication). This is explained in "The general rule is that any statements made by interviewees about themselves, their activities, or anything they are connected to is considered to have come from a primary source." If the article is about the life and times of the interviewee, then that leaves wiggle room for secondary sources.

To reiterate, it doesn't matter if the publication is what you'd consider" high quality".

Remember, encyclopedias are tertiary sources, so it should have filtered the secondary sources, which should had done the same with the primary source. Howard the Duck (talk) 10:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 19:02, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

By now, the article has been culled of her activities with other Bini members. The article now boils to:

Her auditioning for Star Hunt Academy (I think that thing was not called "Star Hunt Auditions"), but then the next sentence says she auditioned for Big Brother first(?)... so which is which???
A section supposedly describing activities since 2021 but only starts in 2024 on a social media incident where she asked for privacy. Then the rest of paragraphy is reactions soup.
Her being WP:INTERVIEWed in Billboard Philippines... I guess the word count increases if you add the name of the interviewer?
Her fashion sense.
Her being an ABS-CBN talent being one of the best dressed in the ABS-CBN Ball... and more fashion sense and no actual modeling.

FWIW, none of these merits inclusion in a BLP article. Howard the Duck (talk) 19:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Elizabeth Dulau (via WP:PROD on 18 May 2025)