Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simran Upadhyay

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Simran Upadhyay

[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)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ACTOR. Probably a case of WP:TOOSOON - The9Man ^(Talk) 07:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^(Talk) 07:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^(Talk) 07:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable actress.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello The9Man thanks for review my created article Simran Upadhayay. And I saw that you consider my created article as deletion. I have created the article by Times of india news link. And I put everything which I got from news article. So may I know the reason why you consider the article for deletion. If you will tell me and guide me to edit better, then I can edit the article better and in future i can do better contribute in wikipedia. Please reply. Thanks

Hi, I appreciate your effort and time to contribute to Wikipedia. However, the encyclopedia has some guidelines for the articles to be published. For this particular case, the person doesn't have any significant work or major secondary socurces to claim the notability. TOI is not considered as a WP:RS anymore. I suggest you to go through WP:BLP to get a better idea. - The9Man ^(Talk) 10:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The9Man, I think you meant to write WP:NACTOR above. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey The9Man , thanks for you reply. You told that TOI is not consider as WP:RS now. But Recently I saw some editor edit article with the reference of TOI. And they got approved. So my question is why my created article got selected for afd. Waiting for you reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myslfsbhijit (talk • contribs) 19:24, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no reliable coverage besides TOI, but even that is for a single role on a soap opera. I can't find anything about the project Classroom that is referenced in the sourcing. Fails WP:NACTOR - it is WP:TOOSOON. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:15, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – no significant coverage in sources, which means that WP:GNG isn't met, nor is WP:NACTOR. --bonadea contributions talk 15:43, 5 July 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.