Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ritviz

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 keep. Note that the nominator and two delete votes were the same editor using sockpuppetry. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 23:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ritviz

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

[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)

~~Not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. LuciferEdits (talk) 15:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)~~ struck confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 July 5. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a perpetual bias towards western content on wikipedia. This isn't the first time. The artist isn't the most important artist but has a considerable presence in Indian electronic dance music genre with large audience. Indian hip-hop and metal acts also face the same bias. I know no one will care because wikipedia remains largely a anglo-american biased portal but just wanted it to be noted that you people deem random useless american artists important and keep one line pages of them but can't do the same for non-american artists. Popoblahblah (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Popoblahblah (talk • contribs) 13:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above rant could be compelling, except the person who nominated the Ritviz article for deletion is also from India. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 01:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

:: @User:Popoblahblah I'm an Indian, mostly editing articles related to India. I've argued many a times to prevent notable Indian articles getting deleted from Wikipedia. Also, this article fails the General notability guidelines to be on Wikipedia, there's no bias based on ethnicity. LuciferEdits (talk) 06:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC) struck sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete : Article is mostly promotional. Not enough reliable sources to establish notability. Coderzombie (talk) 17:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy~~ Keep : The Article was written in a promotional way with majority of refs from youtube video only, I edited it as per wp:npov and add wp:rs like GQ India, The Telegraph (Kolkata), The Hindu and more, Now the article seems non Promotional with sufficient wp:sigcov.Dtt1 (talk) 20:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

after reading WP:CSK suggested by @Doomsdayer520: I made it Keep from Speedy Keep. Dtt1^Talk 08:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Coderzombie (talk) 11:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The nominator and "Delete" voter above seem not to have searched for sources very carefully. The "Speedy Keep" voter misused that term (see WP:CSK) but made a compelling argument on how the musician has received coverage in some reliable media sources in India. The article is still too dependent on links to Youtube and similar stuff, but there is at least enough for a basic stub article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 01:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom, the artist is not notable enough as of now. The article can be created at a later stage. Sidchakrab (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC) [reply]
Delete Per nom. Noobmaster29 (talk) 09:32, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser note: Sidchakrab and Noobmaster29 have been blocked as sockpuppets of the nominator. Mz7 (talk) 23:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep "The Hindu" is doing its best "fluff for pay" impression in the sources, but despite that, there seems to be enough kinda-okay coverage from several quarters. (Note that nominator socked twice here to get this deletion through - see blocked editors just above; great approach, dude) --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:53, 9 July 2020 (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.