Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lijeesh

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:29, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lijeesh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No major leading roles so far. The references are interviews or just passing mentions. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. - The9Man ^(Talk) 09:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^(Talk) 09:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^(Talk) 09:04, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet our super broad notability guidelines for actors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment What is wrong with this source [1]. Ananda Vikatan is a reliable magazine. TamilMirchi (talk) 00:35, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The fact that he is mentioned in several film reviews means that he has played a notable role in them.^[1][2][3] This source states that he plays one of the leads in V1. Reviews aside, the Vikatan source mentioned above dictates all of his career. TamilMirchi (talk) 00:54, 15 July 2020 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: TamilMirchi (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

The WP:NACTOR clearly mentions that, an actor should had significant roles in multiple notable films along with significant coverage. He doesn't had many significant roles so far, also the references are not noteworthy. The Vikatan article is an interview piece and the other three are having just passing mentions about the subject. It is WP:TOOSOON to have an article on him. - The9Man ^(Talk) 06:42, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Has a number of roles and enough sources to be worth keeping.† Encyclopædius 14:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So far he has done are supporting roles. All three references you mentioned are having passing mentions which is not the scope of Significant coverage. - The9Man ^(Talk) 07:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete has played some minor roles in major productions, and there is no substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources. GSS ^💬 17:35, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR.- Akhiljaxxn (talk) 14:34, 30 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.