Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ranjish He Sahi

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. While there are COI issues, the consensus here is sourcing exists to build an article.SPI closed cautioning too close a read into the creator's possible sockpuppet status, so that is not factored in. Attention from uninvolved editors to incorporate these sources would be helpful in terms of creating a bettter article. Star Mississippi 00:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ranjish He Sahi

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination

)

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

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 09:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Hatchens (talk) 09:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

WP:PROMO? If subject is notable and i created the article then what’s is WP:PROMO in this? Please If a person has created something by working hard, then do not destroy it. I created all articles with my own wish. I do not take anything from anyone. If my subject is not notable the you can nominate to afd but please don’t do this without any reason. - IndaneLove (talk) 09:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete - An article should
  speak for itself
  , and this article does not explain why the web series is notable. It lacks Reception information or any other mention of what third parties have said.
  • "I worked hard on it" is an
    Argument to Avoid
    in deletion discussions.
  • Not being notable is a reason in itself to delete. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article may not be complete but it is referenced to six full reviews including reliable sources such as The Hindu, New Indian Express and Rolling Stone. Therefore a reception section could easily be written so this a clear pass of
  WP:GNG in my view, however if sockpuppetry is confirmed in the ongoing case then the article will be G5 deleted. Atlantic306 (talk) 00:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep - this does seem to, as noted, have plenty of reliable sources.
  matt91486 (talk) 04:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It is well sourced, the article needs work, not deletion. CT55555 (talk) 13:46, 11 April 2022 (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.