Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malvika Raj

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) Vexations (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Malvika Raj

[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)

Previously deleted not enough notable. Pilean (talk) 17:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Pilean (talk) 17:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know if it is the recreation of same content-based article that was deleted one year ago per this AfD; and if nothing adds to her notability, this new AfD is unnecessary, the article should be G4ed. ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 17:10, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Keep per the coverage provided by Beccaynr. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^{^(talk)} 05:23, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it or G4, we will see if is applicable.--- Possibly (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pilean, TheAafi, and Possibly:, I removed the G4, as it is not the same person as was discussed at the AfD in question. That person spelled their last name Raaj, with two a's, and is described in the discussion as an actor and model. This person is an artist and fashion designer Theredproject (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG/WP:BASIC; there is significant and in-depth coverage due to her art, e.g. Dalit lives matter: This Bihar painter’s art is her activism (eShe magazine/MoneyControl/MSN News), Talkin’ About a Revolution (Indian Express), Colours of rebellion: Capturing Ambedkar’s life and revolutionary spirit in art (News Minute). Beccaynr (talk) 21:01, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Beccanyr's soruces, and this profile in the Hindu. Clearly there is independent SIGCOV.--- Possibly (talk) 00:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not voting as I'm the creator of the page, but apart from confusion about which person this article concerns, I do want to point out that the sources mentioned by Beccanyr are all referred to and appropriately cited in the article itself. (Moneycontrol, Indian Express, the Hindu, Newsminute and the EShe interview, which was republished in several places). I am confused about why we need to reiterate the sources again but if that will help prevent the article from being deleted, I'm all for it. Happy International Women's Day! Naushervan (talk) 10:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I appreciate the note that the sources are in the article; I was referring to articles I had reviewed to support my conclusion, and could have made that more clear. Also, I think specifically discussing the sources here can be helpful for a determination of WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS, because the sources are facts that can help support an argument per relevant guidelines. Beccaynr (talk) 21:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per wp:gng. Significant coverage in wp:rs. Vikram Vincent 13:18, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have checked with two people with more knowledge of the Indian media environment, and both confirm that these sources are legit WP:RS. Theredproject (talk) 06:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As someone who knows Indian media, and in particular, the issue of marginalized knowledges within this context reasonably well, I can confirm that all the sources are WP:RS - they include well known national newspapers, a government-led cultural institution's site, and the blogs are also well known sources. Anasuyas (talk) 09:20, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons given by Anasuyas Kaybeesquared (talk) 21:19, 13 March 2021 (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.