Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razak Khan

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. Thanks for adding sources. v/r - T P 03:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Razak Khan

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

Effectively unsourced BLP that says nothing about the actor. The Banner talk 19:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - May not meet WP:NACTOR, article is unsourced with just one source showing movies he was in. ///EuroCarGT 00:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can you prove This article doesn't meet WP:NACTOR? There are three requirement to meet Nactor Let me enlighten you

1- Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. 2- Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. 3- Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

I think the number of IMDB and wikipedia article he is listed in as an actor make him pass 1st and 3rd ones. What are your thoughts? @Stemoc: --Foodie (talk) 10:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He passes all 3, lets not forget the cult following he got for his characters "Muna Mobile" and "Ninja Chacha"..--Stemoc (talk) 12:11, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found more References about Razak Khan Here. I just have no idea why without doing enough research about a subject Wiki guys mark it for deletion. --Foodie (talk) 17:17, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:01, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - Isn't the inclusion criteria based on Notability? This man has acted in over 150 films (some not listed on wikipedia and IMDb) and is as notable as the likes of Shakti Kapoor, Johnny Lever, Vijay Raaz and Sadashiv Amrapurkar and i can't believe it took them so many years to make his article albeit a stub...One of the most recognisable support actors in Bollywood..needs a bit of expansion but i have seen worse article on actors on wikipedia...This RfD needs to be added to Indian cinema--Stemoc (talk) 13:18, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read WP:BLP. Articles about living people need to be properly sourced. That is not the case here. The Banner talk 16:00, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then you'd better start searching, there are atleast a 100+ more like these..IMDb is a good enough source--Stemoc (talk) 23:14, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I agree with Stemoc here, i think The Banner you marked this article for deletion without even having to search him on Google or may be you just do not know how to search an actor on Google. See This and i am sure you will be surprised to see 100+ movies he worked in. You could have improved this article yourself instead of wasting time on requesting a delete. --Foodie (talk) 11:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - In fact you created the article without even reading the requirements of WP:BLP. Articles about living about living people need sources in the article. The Banner talk 02:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete but I agree with Stemoc that there are 100s articles on wiki single sourced from IMDB, which is highly unreliable source as you can create any profile on IMDB. Someone needs to take a broom and clean all the out of wiki.--Nlfestival (talk) 21:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I contribute to IMDb and I find adding stuff there is much harder than adding stuff here..there are 5 other links provided on his page so notability isn't the problem here, not to mention, if you google him with his "preferred name" which is "Razzak Khan", you will get over 180,000 hits. He is a well-established actor..I could add one or 2 more lines to make it look like a stub but what would that achieve? Banner's reason for deletion is laughable as i can list atleast 10 more pages here with the same if not less information that has been allowed on wikipedia....I hate Deletionists and thats why i'm supporting to keep this article. If you nominate this article for that reason, you better start making a list and nominate all those 100+ articles for the same reason...--Stemoc (talk) 09:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please read WP:BLP. Articles about living about living people need sources in the article. The Banner talk 02:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. Article Does Pass WP:NACTOR. Out of 150 Movies he worked in, many of them has IMDB and Wikipedia Articles;almost all of them saying Razzak Khan was a part of movie. --Foodie (talk) 10:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The problem is the lack of proper sourcing. The only reference merely tells you that the actor exists. The Banner talk 18:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Will you count some of these as a reference? --Foodie (talk) 09:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Depends. The source should comply with the rules for reliable sources and add something about the actor. Sources in English are preferred, but a good, reliable source in another language or script are also okay. The Banner talk 12:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: User:The Banner's incompetency in understanding worth of Indian actors is amazing. I would suggest them to use their time elsewhere. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Javed Jaffrey was also one such worthless attempt. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 01:33, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Your rudeness and poor ability to read the reason of the AfD is also amazing. So stop your PAs and start adding sources. Alternatively, you run a massive risk to loose the article altogether due to a violation of WP:BLP. The Banner talk 02:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Banner, it would be better if you avoided nominating any "India" related entertainers before people become prejudicial and 'vote stuff' keep on your future nominations... and yes your nom reason is valid but the references provided in the article in terms of external links proves notability. Wikipedia will not delete articles because they are written poorly, they will only delete them if they fail bio. I will add a few lines later to the article but honestly I don't see how that would help and again, there are 100's of articles just like this lacking relevant information. You might wanna concentrate on that..Wikipedia has mainly been about quantity than quality..It hasn't changed much the 7 years i have been here....Maybe next time before nominating, post a message on the creators page to "expand" the article instead of nominating it for deletion, or use of this template on the articles next time "{{Multiple issues|{{BLP sources|date=October 2013}}{{one source|date=October 2013}}{{BLP primary sources|date=October 2013|blp=yes}}}}" --Stemoc (talk) 02:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't care at all where an actor is coming from. When I see an unsourced BLP, I will nominate for deletion according to WP:BLP. That you guys see prejudice in it, in entirely your problem. The Banner talk 10:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- UUUUHHHH!!! Am scared!!! Please forgive me. Don't kill me.
  AFDs are not from cleanup. If at all you are really concerned about the quality, DIY. If you aren't competent enough to do it, ask help at WikiProjects. Raising such silly AFDs is, silly. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just read WP:BLP, dude. Entirely within the guideline what I did. And when you really care about the Indian film industry: find that vandal that is vandalising so many articles. With all my "prejudice", as you guys call it, I have repaired a few hundred articles about actors, actresses, movies and directors. Where where you guys then? The Banner talk 10:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - WP:WALL. You are directing me to a huge WP:BLP page and not explicitly mentioning any clause on it. That's WP:WALL, dude. And what vandal? And i was probably fighting some systemic bias then. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:14, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 17:59, 6 November 2013 (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.