Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shadab Faridi

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. The article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shadab Faridi

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

Non notable musician. The references are both regurgitated press release material. Fiddle Faddle 23:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 00:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BIO and WP:NOTYET. CookieMonster755 (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are insufficient reliable independent sources to establish notability. Gnome de plume (talk) 14:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note The references, such as they were, have now been removed. It is an unreferenced BLP right now. Fiddle Faddle 17:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Timtrent, If there is no references, than it qualifies for speedy deletion. CookieMonster755 (talk) 17:36, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Perhaps so, but it would then be likely to be recreated immediately. There is a Draft: article just waiting to take its place, and of the same quality Fiddle Faddle 17:49, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Comment -- Timtrent -- The user who created the page has been blocked for Abusing multiple accounts: Please see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Talentandbeyond. Maybe that also qualifies for article deletion? If the draft is of the same quality, the draft should not be moved into the mainspace. Cheers. CookieMonster755 (talk) 19:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Talentandbeyond has only been blocked for 24 hours, the sock puppet has been indeffed. You can move faster if you wish. My view is that there is no need to rush. Having something as a draft is not a block to a unilateral move to main namespace by any editor, by the way. Fiddle Faddle 21:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Timtrent, you are probably right. I am just going to let the deletion nomination take its own course. Cheers. CookieMonster755 (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

deleteunotable singer. Wgolf (talk) 02:09, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources to prove notability. AlbinoFerret 15:59, 27 March 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.