Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambarish Bhattacharya

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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ambarish Bhattacharya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG, provided sources are just WP:ROUTINE promotional press in the Times of India and don't back up the grandiose statements made in the article. While his (alleged) filmography is extensive, it's not clear that he has enough major roles in notable works to meet WP:NACTOR Searching for additional coverage, the most significant coverage I could find was some brief praise in this review [1], although it's possible that editors able to search in Bengali may be able to find more coverage. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete : I agree with the nominator, most of the reliable and independent sources seem to be routine promotional press and very short. Couldn't find independent and reliable sources that extensively talk or critique his works. Clearly fails WP:GNG and for SNG, he doesn't seem to fulfill the criteria for WP:NACTOR. AngusMEOW (chatter • paw trail) 21:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete It seems odd that there doesn't seem to be much overage outside of the Times; I'm starting to get the impression that the Times allows PR piece submissions that are published as if they are regular articles (along the lines of Forbes "contributor.") OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:37, 19 September 2020 (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.