Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susovan Roy (2nd 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 clear, and thanks for the CU assist. I'm not going to SALT this because it's clear it's not working, but if someone else feels it should be, feel free. Star Mississippi 14:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susovan Roy

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Non-notable actor, doesn't passes WP:NACTOR. I got a mail from User:Xegma, they written, Hi Taabi, this is my article https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susovan_Roy why you tag deletion for it. Please remove it. I'm that actor pls withdraw it. They also closed the discussion and drafted the page. It's a clear WP:COI. The closing admin can ask me for the proof of their mail, I'll be happy to share. Taabii (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India, and West Bengal. Taabii (talk) 07:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noting here as I did at ANI, Xegma is p-blocked from this discussion to avoid further disruption. They're welcome to contribute elsewhere. Star Mississippi 15:23, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep as per their roles in those two series "Anandamoyee Maa", "Korapakhi" and modeling works with several known brands.~~HeMahon (talk) 13:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)}} — HeMahon (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Blogs19 (talk · contribs). Spicy (talk) 21:07, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Roles mentioned above are not significant roles. Notability is not inherited from notable brands he may have worked for. Sourcing is dodgy PR pieces pretending to be real articles. duffbeerforme (talk) 01:25, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These five sources are 1. IBC24, 2. Navabharat, 3. Krishijagran, 4. Pardaphash, 5. Meghalayamonitor looks independent reporting by their own staffs. 185.48.248.126 (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:22, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Source 3 is written by "reporter" and barely a half page, I can't open source 5... The rest look about as unhelpful. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep: Source 1,3,4 are looks reliable and source 2 and 5 are not much helpful, passes WP:NMODEL as to career as a model.~~ Anktjha (talk) 14:28, 28 January 2025 (UTC) Another sock of Blogs19 Girth Summit _(blether) 12:10, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Getting your mother to take your photo while posing on your balcony does not pass NMODEL. Ask Oracle is clearly not a reliable source. Disagree strongly on 3 and 4. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:57, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ask Oracle is definitely not a reliable source. but ibc24, Krishijagran and Pardaphash are reliable covered by reporter, on this Pardaphash source cleary mentioned that he have worked with notable brands. Anktjha (talk) 04:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Supposedly worked with all those big brands, famous star and all that, but can you find any pictures other than the ones taken by his MOM of him looking very unlike a model? Wikipedia is not here to help him build his fantasy life. Paid for articles with overly flowery prose are not independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Non-notable individual. No evidence that subject warrants a standalone article. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:55, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CU Note Blogs19 socks have been trying to get an article about this person published for years, this is just a new title. See the deleted history at Susovan Sonu Roy and Draft:Susovan Sonu Roy - if I remember correctly they've tried at other titles too, I can't bring them to mind. I thought they'd given up, but I guess they're trying again. The closer should be aware that the account mentioned in the nomination, Xegma, and two of the accounts who have commented above, are all socks of Blogs19, who is the site-banned and globally locked. Girth Summit _(blether) 12:19, 30 January 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.