Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vasant Prabhu (3rd nomination)

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. Consensus is that the article fails the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vasant Prabhu

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This has been tagged for notability for over 7 years, and previous AfDs have been closed because they failed to attract comments. It would be great if this article could finally have its notability resolved. Personally, I don't see that it meets WP:NOTABILITY, but Im aware I may be missing something, as someone who only reads English. Boleyn (talk) 19:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Sole cited source is not RS. I am unable to find in depth coverage from reliable sources necessary to establish notability. Sources cited for the discography appear to be all from the same website that also does not appear to be an RS source. Article currently fails WP:V and the subject fails both GNG and BASIC. Will reconsider if in depth coverage from multiple reliable sources can be found per GNG. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:59, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There is an anglophone blindspot, but the other blindspot is Bollywood's. It appears that the subject is real and did a lot of composing for a film industry that put out a ton of product. It is also a film industry that had an. . .industrial approach to product. . . so this isn't exactly Lieber and Stoller. When 3rd party, reliable sources document Bollywood composers, tertiary sources like Wikipedia can write about these workers. Until then, the subject fails the notability guidelines. Hithladaeus (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the opinion. But fact check first: He didn't work for Bollywood. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Needs to be expanded to assert notability which can't be done since the subject is not covered enough.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and delete - My searches found nothing significant (News, Books, browser, highbeam and thefreelibrary) with Books providing what seems to be only one source. It wouldn't be surprising if alot of these sources are non-English and offline. If people familiar with the subject and access to sources, the article can be started again but I'm not seeing much (past the current sources) for an article. SwisterTwister talk 15:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Question: How many of the editors over here could search the topic in the language the subject worked? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:57, 3 June 2015 (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.