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. 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:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Entertainment/archive

Anna Mannheimer (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)

Not notable WP Journalists, nor WP Anybio Cinder painter (talk) 12:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 13:45, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, and Entertainment. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:06, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Professor Backwards (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 per WP:TNT. Been tagged since 2009 and nobody has pitched in. So many issues in this article, including the use of many quotes with no supporting attributed sources of potentially copyrighted materials. (his jokes probably are copyrighted and these quotes are likely copyright infringements unless we give attribution). The only source used is an SNL transcript which is a primary source. There's unsubstantiated claims of varying kinds that require a source because of the nature of the claim. This person is notable but the article requires a complete rewrite. Best to blow this up and start over from scratch.4meter4 (talk) 02:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Entertainment, and Georgia (U.S. state). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and per not WP:NOTQUOTE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets WP:GNG, he has sources on him in Newspapers.com, Professor Backwards To Entertain At Taylorville Country Club Stag (The Taylorville Daily Breeze Courier), Prof. Backwards (Nosdnomde) Staging Swohs Twice Nightly (The Morning Call), Professor Backward Hit With 'drawkcaB' Actions (The Commercial Appeal), Professor Backwards Comes To Greenville (The Greenville News) and Professor's Murder Predictable (The Greenville News). It doesn't have to be deleted, it could still be rewritten in the same article. MoviesandTelevisionFan (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We might have to get an admin to redact the copyright infringed material from the article history if you want to pursue this option.4meter4 (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harsh Beniwal (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)

Here we are again, a year after the fourth deletion discussion was closed as Delete. Speedy was declined so we are here to decide yet once again if this meets notability guidelines. Nothing since the last AfD shows notability. Note that most of the press is from reliable sources, but it is all similar to this which is unreliable churnalism and falls under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. CNMall41 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Pinging everyone from the last deletion discussion to see if they see anything I don't as far as notability that has taken place since this was closed in 2023. @Worldiswide:, @Mooonswimmer:, @Edwardx:, @Pharaoh of the Wizards:
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment, Internet, and Delhi. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Sources 2 and 7 are RS, but trivial coverage, barely anything beyond a paragraph. This [1] is about what you find, celebrity shares photos. This [2] is barely longer than a paragraph. We don't have enough sourcing for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: meets WP:NACTOR or WP:ENTERTAINER as Harsh has had played significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows. He has played an important role in the film Student of the Year 2, played the lead role in the film Checkmate.. He has also played the lead role in the series Who's Your Daddy?, Who Killed Jessica?, and Heartbeats, also played an important role in the TV series Campus Diaries. This is an in-depth coverage which is talking about his journey. 1, 2 are reliable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitujadab90 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is unreliable per WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The other two were already decided in the four previous AfD's to not be enough. Looking closer, they are churnalism based off the announcement of his roles. What press can you provide since the last AfD that would be considered in-depth?--CNMall41 (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Checked WP:NEWSORGINDIA; not a single word is saying News18 is unreliable. So we can say News18 is a reliable source. The other two are not churnalism, as the two articles are written by journalists; the 1st is reported by Archit Mehta on May 7, 2019, and the 2nd one is reported by Sana Farzeen on April 13, 2019. Jitujadab90 (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. Just because NEWSORGINDIA doesn't explicitly mention News18 among the examples it gives of media outlets engaging in churnalism, doesn't mean that News18 doesn't do that; a variation on the theme of "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". In any case, NEWSORGINDIA is making the general point that "even legitimate" outlets commonly do this. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, respected or legitimate news outlets sometimes engage in churnalism. But does this mean News18 is an unreliable source? If so, then on what basis will you judge that News18 is an unreliable source? Can you point to any policy that backs up the statement that News18 is unreliable? Jitujadab90 (talk) 09:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it means that News18 shouldn't likely be used if you have better sources. Churnalism is the issue, not any news source in particular. Oaktree b (talk) 16:48, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of these sources? 1 2 Jitujadab90 (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No one said the publication is not reliable. The source itself is unreliable per NEWSORGINDIA. There is no byline, it is marked as being created by "buzz staff" or "trending desk" which is a clear sign of churnalism. So, it is not that News18 isn't reliable...it is that particular reference in News18 that is unreliable. As far as the two you just posted above, they are not in-depth and the second one (the publication itself) is unreliable. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will stick to my vote to keep, as Harsh has more than 16 million subscribers on YouTube (according to WP:NYOUTUBE, Subscriber count helps meet the second criteria of WP:ENT). Also, he has had significant roles in multiple notable television shows such as Campus Diaries, Who's Your Daddy?, Who Killed Jessica?, and Heartbeats, thus satisfying WP:ENT. Jitujadab90 (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That essay is a great guide, but there is no subject-specific criteria for notability on YouTubers. I do respect your contention and the right to vote !Keep however. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Call-Me Kevin (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:NBIO and WP:NBASIC; didn't find any reliable sources that contain significant coverage of him. Most references in the article currently don't establish notability of O'Reilly and are either not reliable or not in-depth coverage of him. ~ Tails Wx 16:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Ireland. Shellwood (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Internet. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:42, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I don't normally weigh-in on YouTuber AfD discussions (as they often seem to rely on relative perceptions of "fame"). However, the sources in this article are woeful. Effectively all are primary sources. Where the subject(s) own YouTube statements are relied upon as fact. While this might just about be "OK" in the context of WP:ABOUTSELF, it is not "OK" (certainly not in establishing notability) that effectively all of the sources are self-published/self-statements. The handful of secondary sources in the article are barely brief passing mentions. And are placed alongside text that they unequivocally do not support. Like those screenrant.com and thegamer.com webpages - which do not support the text of the "collaborations" section they are placed within. At all. Not even close. It's hard to offer an objective AfD recommendation in the face of this type of WP:REFBOMBing. Guliolopez (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I note that a draft, Draft:Call Me Kevin, has been created/declined/deleted/recreated several times. And that Call Me Kevin (without the oddly placed "-" character in the title under discussion) was also previously deleted. Guliolopez (talk) 20:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No coverage in RS in the article, hardly anything at length that I can find. This [3] is fine, but it's only a paragraph in a list of other Irish people. Oaktree b (talk) 21:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I tried to find sources about Kevin awhile ago and still now coverage. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 03:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Dimitri (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)

Dubious notablity. The previous Afd claimed "good sources" which were subsequently refbombed to the article. I reviewed them (and some others) and see nothing but short blurbs in run-off-the-mill reviews of some circus performances and no significant coverage of the person in depth. --Altenmann >talk 23:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC) [reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Switzerland. Shellwood (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. I don't know a lot about this kind of thing, but there are a lot of hits on Swiss newspaper archives [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] some more significant than others. A few look pretty OK, but some are reviews of his performances. If not notable, ATD merge to his father, Dimitri (clown), who is notable. There are more but searching Scriptorium is a nightmare. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, there are plenty of hits, because he did plenty of performances. But we need in-depth coverage and the article was not at all improved since its first nomination, hence it exhausted its "presumption of notability" and must go. --Altenmann >talk 23:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Well if the sourcing isn't good enough that's one thing but as far as I'm aware there isn't a set number of AfDs that make WP:NEXIST not apply. There are a lot of listings but there are some sources that seem to be sigcov on the man. So I am unsure. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Brar (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)

Unable to satisfy WP:GNG. Lack of significant coverage. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and India. B-Factor (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Non-notable singer, going viral isn't the level of notability we need. [16] is an interview. Source 3 in the article is a list of many people, not mostly about this person. I don't see enough for notability at this time. Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  going viral is a context, hitting the charts across multiple countries is notability as defined by the notability guidenlines for Wikipedia Music pages. Wikpedia Music Guidelines notability also defines the release by a major record label as the current case is. There are more sources added by other users as well. G4gurpreet (talk) 09:27, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It doesn't guarantee notability, it's a sign the person could be notable. The Spotify charts aren't ones we use for notability and there is no other sourcing for any sort of charting... We can't use any of these. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I found a source from The Times of India, but I'm not sure if it helps. Aona1212 (talk) 13:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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