Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Entertainment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Entertainment. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Entertainment|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Entertainment. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Entertainment

[edit]

Marudhu Pandiyan

[edit]
Marudhu Pandiyan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFILMMAKER and WP:GNG. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd references in the article are reviews about the film. LKBT (talk) 12:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Akashia (drag queen)

[edit]
Akashia (drag queen) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability is not demonstrated. Sources in order of citenote:

1. Fansite with dubious (fictitious?) "statistics" of drag queen skills

2. A mention in a "where are they now?" EW article on the RPDR S1 cast

3. User-generated wiki

4. User-generated wiki

5. A blog/directory of drag pageant queens

6. A very brief mention in a Yahoo list of drag queen cameos in music videos

7. Named once as an aside in an article about other drag queens

8. People Magazine coverage of an episode of TV that the article subject made a cameo in

9. Somebody's blog, not even styling itself as anything more legit than that

10. YouTube clip of the TV episode covered in People

11. Self-published YouTube video by the article's subject

12. Music video in which article subject appeared

13. User-generated wiki

Subject also doesn't meet WP:ENTERTAINER, having only one notable role to her credit. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. That was fast. Feels a bit personal or maybe something else. Who knows. Regardless, I disagree completely. If Akashia isn't notable enough then there are a lot of articles on WP that will need to be removed.
First, it should be noted that Akashia is one of 5 contestants out of the 200+ contestants from the US franchise of Drag Race that doesn't have a WP article. There are other contestants that have far fewer citations from far less reliable sources. I did hours of extensive research to put together this article and believe that I have met the standard. Second, being from season 1, mainstream media wasn't paying as much attention to the show or the show's contestants. That makes it much harder to find citations beyond non-traditional media.
Regardless, understanding that this is about notability, beyond the citations that have been included already, I have now added more references to support Akashia's notability. The inclusion of the YouTube clips 10, 11 and 12 was to support the mention of appearances as is standard protocol for artists. As I mentioned on the talk page, I included the one blog article because it was unique content not found elsewhere. User-generated wikis are included to support information found in other mainstream media. BadNewsBear (talk) 03:12, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Following on my comments and additional citations, I looked at the WP articles of some of the lesser known contestants from the first 10 seasons of the show, and based on the criteria laid out by @Zanahary, the following articles should arguably be deleted: Phoenix, The Princess, Penny Tration, Serena ChaCha, Tempest DuJour, Sasha Belle, Kandy Ho, Max, Dhalia Sin. And that's just a quick scan. If I dig into each page, particularly from the earlier seasons when there was less coverage from mainstream media - not to mention the advent of social media - would each of these contestants stand up to the test for natability?
An important question to ask is about notability is does a person's participation in such a culturally significant show as RuPaul's Drag Race lead to notability. If we were to look up the cast of other reality television series, do those contestants meet the standard of notability? For example, Jamie Kern Lima or Holly Meowy of Big Brother or Bradford Cohen or Kelly Perdew from The Apprentice. Or Sarah Kozer from Joe Millionaire. I would argue that none of these people's articles show notability. Yet none of these articles has been nominated for deletion.
The criteria for WP:Entertainer is "The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." I would argue that Akashia meets that standard easily - better than some other contestants from Drag Race, and far better than numerous people who have articles on WP.
I will continue to add to this article, but I believe I have met the standard for notability. BadNewsBear (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @BadNewsBear, thanks for engaging, and I know it's dismaying to have an article nominated for deletion. Don't worry, this isn't personal—I don't know you; this article was just at the top of the new pages feed when I opened it.
That other article subjects may also fail notability criteria is not an argument for keeping this one—see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for an explanation. If you do feel that these other articles should be deleted, please nominate them for deletion. I'll take a look at the ones you linked myself.
Re: your question about whether participation in a culturally significant show brings a person to notability for Wikipedia's purposes, the answer is no—our notability guidelines are more strict than that. If just taking part in a significant show were enough, then the notability guidelines would say so. Instead, WP:ENTERTAINER specifies that subjects must have had significant roles in multiple ... productions. One arguably significant role in RuPaul's Drag Race and a handful of non-significant cameo roles in the same show does not meet that criterion.
Akashia is not shown in any reliable sources to have made unique, prolific, or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:04, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Zanahary. I'm happy to engage, and I'm not taking anything personally. I'll freely admit that my contributions to WP have been sporadic and limited so I'm not an 'expert' by any means, although I'm trying to be a better contributor. It was the speed at which you added the deletion tag that surprised me. I also noted that you have nominated a few pages for deletion today. Regardless, from my research WP recommends working to improve the article before deletion, and that is what I'm trying to do and encouraging other editors to do the same.
None the less, I still disagree with your interpretation of the guidelines. WP:ENTERTAINER specifies that a person may be considered notable if:
  1. The person has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or
  2. The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
Emphasis on OR. Being part of the first case of RuPaul's Drag Race is, in itself, unique, prolific and innovation. Regardless of how people feel about Akashia (I have my own opinion), her participation in the show was ground breaking and meets the criteria of unique, prolific and innovative, as is the case for every other cast member from season 1. The show changed television in so many ways, and I believe have presented numerous citation that show that.
I don't believe the other articles (at least for the RPDR contestants) should be deleted because I believe they have met the criteria for notability just as Akashia has. BadNewsBear (talk) 04:52, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I consider your interpretation of the entertainer notability guideline to mean that everyone who competed on the inaugural season of a show considered to be "ground-breaking" is notable to be a big stretch (see WP:NOTINHERITED), but that's something we can allow others to weigh in on. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Zanahary! As someone who is a reality tv fan, there's one person in particular who always make Wikipedia articles of the contestants. I don't know why, but it doesn't bother me. If you go to my page, I usually just edit reality tv personal pages and also people from New York because I'm also from New York. Some of them don't have a lot of info, but it's our job to provide and educate people.
Akashia being on the first season (in 2009) and it being a very queer and black show makes it hard to find information because of the times. Joey Nolfi from EW has really been the only reporter who consistently giving interviews with these girls, making it hard for the older season girls to give interviews. Me and @BadNewsBear will try and find better sources. Going through BNB's page, he's very passionate about queer history, and as a bi history nerd myself, I get why he made this article. This article also follows the second rule:
"The person has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment."
While it 100% does need better sources, I don't think it should be deleted. Many articles need better sources and some even half very few but nobody tried deleting them. I know Acacia Forgot and Arrietty had their pages remove but it's back up, and that would just happen with Akashia. It just takes time, especially with older internet. 2009 wasn't that long, but due to the cultural background of the show, there was little to no articles from 2009 about season 1. MiitomoChris (talk) 05:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If sources that establish notability can be found, then that's great and the article ought to (and will) be kept. If those sources don't exist, regardless of why or whether it's right or fair that that's the case, notability standards are notability standards—the whole reason they exist is because we on Wikipedia follow the lead of reliable secondary sources.
For third parties: MiitomoChris was canvassed to this discussion via his Talk page. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sheen Magazine

[edit]
Sheen Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability isn't shown through reliable sources (see analysis table below). The author of the article admitted in the draft process that there weren't a lot of articles they could locate that were significant coverage. If this is the best that can be found, then there isn't truly significant coverage to be found. A Google News search shows a lot of press release type things and some coverage of individuals being mentioned in the magazine, but little about the magazine itself. CountryANDWestern (talk) 21:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source analysis
Source 1 Behind a paywall; the title, "Meet Kimberly Chapman" suggests the article focuses on the magazine's founder and not the magazine itself.
Source 2 An interview with the founder; magazine gets mentioned in two sentences.
Source 3 A press release from the magazine about its awards ceremony.
Source 4 Main crux of the article is about the subject, Whitfield, being on the cover of the magazine and then talks in more depth about her, not the magazine.
Source 5 An article/blog post by a contributor to Sheen ("I am not sure if you are aware or not but I write for a beauty & entertainment magazine, Sheen.")
Source 6 Gossip column type fare about the fashion at a party that the magazine hosted.
Source 7 Seems to be just a link to a Sheen Magazine article.
Aren't the Black Owned Businesses and African-American Magazines categories deemed significant? 82.126.152.14 (talk) 06:37, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ariel Alexandria Davis

[edit]
Ariel Alexandria Davis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete or redirect to The Haunted Mansion (2003 film). Per her IMDB page, her only prominent role appears to be in Haunted Mansion. She otherwise has five guest roles (only two of which are named characters) and a recurring role on Everybody Hates Chris. This AfD really comes down to whether appearing in portions of six of the first 23 episodes of an 88 episode sitcom is a significant role under under WP:ENT AND whether the word multiple under WP:ENT really means two total non-guest roles. My belief is no, appearing in Haunted Mansion and Everybody Loves Chris does not make the subject "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." This would be a similar outcome as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmy Clarke and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Dee Davis. Mpen320 (talk) 18:37, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Patel

[edit]
Jay Patel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A promotional biographical page of a film producer fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. None of the sources constitute WP:SIGCOV. LKBT (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart Laws

[edit]
Stuart Laws (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a stand-up comedian, not referenced to any evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources. As always, comedians are not inherently notable just for existing, and have to show coverage about them and their work to pass GNG -- but this is referenced entirely to primary sources (comedy special sourced to own broadcaster, appearances at comedy clubs sourced to the self-published websites of those clubs, etc.) with not a single hit of GNG-worthy media coverage about him shown at all.
As he's British, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with deeper access to British media can salvage it with proper sourcing -- but again, notability is not established by using primary sources to verify that he did a thing, it resides in the amount of media coverage he did or didn't get about the thing he did, and nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on proper media coverage. Bearcat (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article does not appear to meet the WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER notability guidelines. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 18:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback, @Bearcat: — I've updated the article with more independent sources from The Guardian and Variety. Let me know if more is needed and I can look for a few more UK sources. Berlination (talk) 14:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This wiki has hardly been up at all, I don't see the point in deleting it when it has not had the time to receive any sort of proper editing and/or sources> Acolakes (talk) 03:54, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sufficient sourcing to establish that the subject is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article at all has to be present in the article the moment it's even created in the first place. The article doesn't already have to be perfect, but it does have to already have enough proper reliable sourcing in it to establish that the subject passes GNG in the first place — and because anybody can create a bad article about anything whether it's improvable with better sourcing or not, articles are not exempted from having to have legitimate GNG-worthy sourcing in them just because they're new. Which is why "the article is new, give it time" is listed as an argument to avoid in AFD discussions — the rule is "proper sourcing now", not "articles get grace periods to rest on bad sourcing pending the future addition of better sources that haven't already been shown to exist". Bearcat (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify I don't think this article meets GNG currently, but it is a new article and could be improved with more time so it would be preferable to draftify and incubate it. I think the subject probably meets second criteria of WP:ENT, especially in their role for the industry in writing and directing for many major British comedians. Some secondary sources which could potentially be added in future include Broadway World, Guardian, Scotsman, although more need to be added too. Happily888 (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I added more content and sources to this, including UK news sources. Berlination (talk) 15:33, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gusti Irwan Wibowo

[edit]
Gusti Irwan Wibowo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN, At first glance it looks like a news site, it is not formulated as an article. Lobogamio (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC) struck confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Lobogamio did you create an account just to tag this? @Liz: this seems odd? Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --pro-anti-air (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Fails GNG and NMUSICIAN. The mere act of releasing an album is not a guarantee of notability, and I see nothing otherwise that would do so. As written, the article fails all 12 of the NMUSICIAN criteria. As far as GNG, of the three sources that are there, the first is a blogspot link, which fails RS. The second source only established year of birth and where he went to school, neither of which establish notability. The third source appears to be some sort of celebrity digital media site, and whether it's reliable is probably up for debate. The fact that this article is getting filled with sources that aren't establishing anything other than basic data, and was started by an editor who otherwise does nothing but make large numbers of small formatting edits (like removing middle initials from wikilinks), and has a number of edits that are causing the user to get talkpage notices tells me there's a potential WP:CIR issue here. 146.115.58.160 (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    While I don't doubt the primary claims about sourcing, I don't think your claims about the editor who created are necessarily accurate or relveant.
    For example the claim about "otherwise does nothing but make large numbers of small formatting edits" seems not only an unnecessary attack, as AfD should be considering primarily the article. But it also appears inaccurate, as they are informed (on their talk page) that an article they have created is "in the news", which means I am unsure as to why you have decided this may be a WP:CIR issue (as the comments on their talk page suggest some level of comptency in creating articles). Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 18:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If you want to get pedantic, the "in the news" was for an article the user updated (not created), and that update consisted solely of changing the infobox template used (for some unknown reason) and adding a reference to a Fox News article for date of death, which was subsequently removed by another editor. The user neither created nor substantially contributed to that article, and the rest of the talk page is full of warnings about infobox editing, contentious topics editing, lack of RS, etc. I would also note the user generally has no edits over 200 bytes in length (most of which are mobile edits), and when the user created Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the actual listbox in the article says "space policy" (which I fixed). So I would say that yes, it's relevant because the user has problems with basic editing and proofing. 146.115.58.160 (talk) 19:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Uh? I created the article, I have over 1,200 page creations to my name, are you getting me mixed up with one of the other editors? I have never made random edits like the ones you are claiming? ....also I did not create Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy Thief-River-Faller (talk) 22:31, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify, I have been able to find some sources with English translations (of dubious quality but at least the gist can be understood) that provide some sort of analysis of his work (such as this one), although not being particularly involved in music specific articles and policy I am unsure if this would simply count as routine coverage or might impart at least some notability. The same news agency discusses what was intended to be his attendance to a festival and collaboration with other artists here, although this one I'm far doubtful of meaningfully contributing. As such, having excluded use of obituaries, I think that someone more dedicated (and who can read Indonesian) may be able to find further sourcing for notability, and thus draftification such that more work can be done may be suitable although I can also understand the reasons for deletion and hold no fundemental opposition to it.. Emily.Owl ( she/her • talk) 18:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to assess changes later in the AfD
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:05, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I agree with DesiMoore, The subject fails to meet both WP:GNG and WP:NMUSICIAN and many of the sources cited are WP:PRIMARY. Based on my research, he only gained recognition after his death. Prior to that, there were no articles that would establish notability. Fikri Nurfadillah Rahma (talk) 05:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist to assess the sources added since nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:59, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

Proposed deletions

[edit]

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Entertainment&oldid=1300130265"