Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shah Sharabeel

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shah Sharabeel[edit]

[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)

So, the BLP claims the subject is a DIREVTOR, but it appears the only thing he's directed is some show called "Twins Apart" The issue I'm seeing is that the coverage about this show is mostly in The News, like this, this and this. And per WP:SIGCOV, multiple publications from the same author or organization usually count as a single source, so at most, they count as one source. And I did find coverage on his show in other RS such as the Express Tribune like this, but nothing else. Also, it appears he has only directed this one show, which received some coverage in RS. So, is merely directing one show enough to pass WP:NDIRECTOR? Seems like a very ROTM DIRECTOR to me. This also raises the question: if anyone just directs a drama and gets some press coverage on it, do they automatically qualify for a Wikipedia BLP?

No offense to the creator of this page, of course but only a UPE would bother creating a BLP for such a ROTM director. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete First of all Saqib, i am not a UPE, and don't get personal everytime by calling this term without any evidence as admin has already warned you multiple times. Secondly if it is a case of UPE, then why the article is stub and with that much less data. You can check history i never added material or promotional tone after creation.

As to why i voted delete, I saw his work in a theatre and created his page after checking coverage in RS. Anyways, Did'nt even remembered him since then. Although he still has a coverage on reliable sources but i dont think theatre actor can have a wikipidea article & i am not a UPE who will be affected after deletion. Libraa2019 (talk) 20:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Theatre. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Libraa2019 I didn't explicitly call you or anyone a UPE. I simply mentioned that only a UPE might create a BLP for a ROTM director, so no need to stress about it. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 23:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- lack of sigcov of more than one notable work. Happy to change my vote if someone discovers a ref that give a good description of his directing or acting. BTW, the article doesn't even say that he is an actor, so I deleted the assertion from the IB and categories. Is he? If so, the article should say so. And the refs should go immediately after the fact that they are verifying, rather than all lumped together. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:36, 14 May 2024 (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.