Wikipedia:articles For Deletion Mayank Shekhar

Mayank Shekhar

[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)

Article does not meet WP:GNG and WP:JOURNALIST. Subject did receive an award Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism. Source 1 is a book review, source 2 is a blog, source 3 has a passing comment made by the subject himself, source 4 is a review by subject himself, source 5 is a bio written by subject himself, source 6 is more on bio written by subject himself, source 7 is a link to Ramnath Goenka Award and source 8 is a book written by subject himself. Many unreliable and primary sources here. Draftify would be an option to improve the page with secondary independent sources and remove primary sources like the reviews by the subject himself and the interview with the subject. RangersRus ( talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

If the award is judged significant enough, he could meet WP:ANYBIO. If his books have received coverage that is judged sufficiently significant (including the review you mention, or https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/name-place-animal-thing-of-bollywood-trivia-popular-culture/articleshow/52685080.cms or https://www.spectralhues.com/news/bookreview-name-place-animal-thing-mayank-shekhar/), he might also meet WP:AUTHOR. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

TOI makes it under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. I still do not find his books a significant monument or been a substantial part of a significant exhibition or won wide significant critical attention by well known peers and critics in secondary independent sources. RangersRus ( talk) 18:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

TOI falling under NEWSORGINDIA is an interpretation that I respect but with which I disagree in this case (not great journalism but not simply unreliable). The fact that the author of the book is one of the film critics of the Hindustan Times also indicates the article in the TOI should be rather independent.-- - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note about the Times of India: The Sources noticeboard says not to use it for political subject matters for example, which the Indian task force clarifies: "Uncontroversial content such as film reviews are usable". Consensus is that concern about retributed coverage exists, but not to the point of making it unreliable. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Reply to Note: TOI has trivia (likely promotion) from the subject's book and is not a review that I glanced over again and spectralhues.com is likely unreliable source as it says "Spectral Hues has been founded by a couple of starry-eyed romantics with their feet firmly planted on the ground (a rather unusual combination, we know!)." This is not a well established news media or website. About The Times of India, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable. It has a bias in favor of the Indian government and is known to accept payments from persons and entities in exchange for positive coverage. So this puts in question the promotion by using trivia taken from the book written by the subject. RangersRus ( talk) 14:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, Film, and India. RangersRus ( talk) 15:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep - clearly notable; a prolific film critic who is also known for his in-depth interviews with major film stars. The Ramnath Goenka Award for Excellence in Journalism is no mean achievement, and he is the first film critic to have received it. I have added a reference for an interview with him for the The Asian Age. At best, the article needs expansion, certainly not deletion. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)— Note to closing admin: Shshshsh ( talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. reply

Indeed, I should have mentioned that I hapeen to have been the creator of this page many years back. I actually didn't even remember I was the one who created it, as I've created numerous pages for notable Indian film critics. As someone who has worked on Indian cinema-related articles, I can attest to the relevance of his reviews on dozens of film articles, including several FAs. Him being an author as well as the winner of a notable award only consolidates my position. Shahid • ^Talk2me 18:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
interviews are primary sources that needs to cite the truth of the statements unless attributed. RangersRus ( talk) 11:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply
@ RangersRus: Didn't undersrtand what you said here, please explain. Shahid • ^Talk2me 13:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Interviews are considered primary non-independent source. Independent sources helps to fairly portray the subject, without undue attention to the subject's own views. If you use interviews as source for any statement made by the subject then the subject's statements needs to be cited with secondary independent source as well. Wikipedia:Independent sources. RangersRus ( talk) 14:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep, see my reply to nomination above.- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep Clearly notable.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply
Keep very much notable, as pointed out above. Krimuk2.0 ( talk) 09:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply