Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamaljeet Negi

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. ✗plicit 11:03, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kamaljeet Negi

[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)

Disputed draftification, thus WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies. Fails WP:NFILMMAKER / WP:BIO 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 06:57, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Arts, Film, Visual arts, and India. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 06:57, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. ROTM cinematographer but fails WP:ANYBIO and the WP:GNG, no sourcing could be found to demonstrate otherwise. And as the nomination stated, none of the criteria of WP:NFILMMAKER are satisfied. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 10:44, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:59, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NFILMMAKER and WP:ANYBIO. I would support re-draftifying this, with move protection, as an WP:ATD. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I thought about speedying this... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:30, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Does not meet WP:NFILMMAKER or WP:ANYBIO. Ravensfire (talk) 17:36, 16 September 2025 (UTC) [reply]
- ~~Draftify~~ at this point. The article was not in good shape when AFD'd, way too much unsourced information, MOS issues and not the best writing. The lead doesn't help this at all, as it's not written in the usual format (ZYX is a PDQ from DEF), and it skips over what's probably the best way to show notability - winning the 59th Filmfare Awards Filmfare Award for Best Cinematography [1]. They've also been nominated for another in 2022.[2] As alternative to deletion, move this back to draft, semi-protect it from moving as YAKSH75 doesn't seem to really take in the feedback given. Ravensfire (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Replying to my own comment, what's lacking here are good sources that have significant coverage of Negi. Interviews are not independent from the subject and don't help much for notability. Same with their own website, WP:PRIMARY. Films need sources supporting Negi's involvement. Ravensfire (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as noted, WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies, so deletion is the only option given the notability issues I mentioned. Ravensfire (talk) 13:04, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  @Ravensfire Should a consensus emerge for sending to Draft, that overrides DRAFTOBJECT. At present that consensus does not appear to be emerging, but there is time for that to happen. As nominator I would be content with that consensus based outcome. Perhaps we are WP:TOOSOON in the subject's career, though, for it to happen. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 14:09, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This article does not speak for itself and gives no indication to a reader who does not check the sources as to why the subject is biographically notable. Deletion is to be preferred over draftification, because it has already been draftified once. The originator will be free to create a new draft or article after deletion, subject to a new AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:48, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article clearly fail in WP:ANYBIO person does not pass the notability criteria.Mehru13 (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2025 (UTC) Mehru13 (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per statements above. Svartner (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2025 (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.