Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amit Bhadana (2nd nomination)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Jack Frost (talk) 03:18, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amit Bhadana

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The subject of article lacks WP:NN. Being merely a YouTuber doesn't prove his notability. The article does not cite any independent coverage in reliable sources. Neurofreak (talk) 14:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The problem is partly that it needs a better article, and partly that search engines are intent on showing crap like Youtube (because adverts there make money) instead of showing articles in Indian/Pakistan newspapers. If you try the name of a publication and the guy's name, you get some good hits,[1] and some mentions in passing.[2][3] Though you need to be careful, this hit[4] is to another guy of the same name.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:25, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has coverage in multiple reliable sources as shown above so he should be included in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Republic TV is extensively writing about YouTubers contradict to WP:NOT and WP:GUIDELINE. I fear about the subject's media coverage as the said TV channel is the first English-language website that wrote about the subject. It was later circulated/distributed by the other news sources. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 18:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Information in multiple sources is available for Amit Bhadana and according to me it meets all Wikipedia guildelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IRoyalYadav (talk • contribs) 06:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:SUSTAINED coverage in four national newspapers / TV channels over an 18-month period. Meets #2 of WP:ENT: 'has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following'. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 10:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: With sources indicated by Toddy1, the article is good enough to pass WP:GNG. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 9 July 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.