Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bobby Kumar

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. RL0919 (talk) 15:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bobby Kumar

[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)

Subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources hence falls short of WP:GNG & does not satisfy WP: NACTOR either. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 14:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete this is a clear attempt to game the system. The article's creator already submitted Draft:Bobby Kumar, which was rejected due to lack of notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hyperbolick (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. Yet to establish WP:GNG. PenulisHantu (talk) 18:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The process being used her is why I think we should only allow new articles to be created by AfD. This would probably require more people to focus on AfD, which might be hard to bring about, but it would save us headaches.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
delete the subject fails WP:GNG, as well as WP:NACTOR. Also support speedy delete as WP:SNOW can be applied. @John: I am not sure what you meant. Sometimes, I think any registered users should be allowed to create new articles, and sometimes I think we should set the bar to extended confirmed. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:48, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I meant "only allow articles to be created through AfC". In the early days of Wikipedia we allow non-registered users to create articles. 4 Tolkien related articles were created one day back in December 2002 by one non-registered user. one was on Barahir which never had any sources for the next 17 years until it was deleted this month.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:11, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey usernamekiran & Johnpacklambert you both have sound & valid arguments here. The thought that anyone can create an article is borderline annoying & for relatively new users I feel they should be compelled to submit their articles via the AFC until they prove they have grasped the concept of notability.Celestina007 (talk) 15:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This person is pretty non-notable. - MA Javadi (talk) 23:17, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: As per nomination (but he may become notable in the near future). Dflaw4 (talk) 13:36, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:MILL, WP:TOOSOON, and WP:SNOW. Nobody disagrees that this is a run of the mill actor, not ready for an article yet. Bearian (talk) 15:32, 27 January 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.