Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Entertainment

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:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Entertainment/archive

watch

Entertainment

Krishnan Vasant

Krishnan Vasant (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 draft of this article was declined and just two days later this is created directly in the main space. A conflict of interest is declared on the draft but that has nothing to do with this nomination. The subject fails WP:NBIO per WP:BEFORE. Ednabrenze (talk) 11:22, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, Entertainment, and India. Ednabrenze (talk) 11:22, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Karnataka, and Tamil Nadu. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:35, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

  Hi Ednabrenze please check again this is not a film. He is my mentor, Krishnan Vasant is a filmmaker with 15 films Prasadpaturi (talk) 11:44, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Im on the fence here, the author has disclosed his COI with the subject however the subject might just satisfy WP:BIO as per the source here also there is more coverage by the same newspaper on the subject. Pizza on Pineapple ^{(Let's eat🍕)} 13:20, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: I do not see WP:SIGCOV other than the ref1. The nominator mentioned WP:FILM, however, I think this topic fails WP:CREATIVE AlphaCore talk 14:03, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

@Ednabrenze Please review your nomination comment, the article is a WP:BIO. AlphaCore talk 14:09, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

Sir he has done 15 films. you can check all of his films once on wikipedia and then decide.

He played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work please check his films once sir Prasadpaturi (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - Fails WP:CREATIVE. OP was told this twice at Draft:Krishnan Vasant prior to creating it live in the mainspace. Would suggest draftifying as an WP:ATD if OP agrees not to move it to mainspace on their own. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:34, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

  Sir i ask AlphaCore but they never replied. If 15 films are not collective body of work then i dont know what is. Please tell me what i did wrong Prasadpaturi (talk) 12:41, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

  Krishnan Vasant is not notable enough for websites like 'Cinetown' to have listed his date of birth. [It is left empty.]

  Shouldn't it be deleted?—I am a new editor, so I just came here to see/understand the deletion process. Z-Astro3 (talk) 14:53, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

  In fact, there are 0 (reliable) sources staring his date of birth. The only website is Filmy Focus – There is no information backing the statement on the website. Z-Astro3 (talk) 14:55, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Madeline Pendleton

Madeline Pendleton (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)

Tagged for notability and neutrality for four months, since September. Fails WP:NBUSINESSPERSON and WP:AUTHOR: Tunnel Vision clothing does not stand out commercially among other businesses since its foundation in 2014, and her only book has not won any awards or been included in bestselling lists. NoonIcarus (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Entertainment, Fashion, and California. NoonIcarus (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NoonIcarus (talk) 16:52, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: I looked through the book Viral Justice: How We Grow the World We Want (source 5 in the article), but I could not find any mention of them on any page nor in the extensive index which lists out every person and company written about in the book. death pact (again) 19:13, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

I have added a failed verification tag accordingly. --NoonIcarus (talk) 19:16, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

The source appears to have been cut from the book. It's still listed in Google Books, but in the copy I purchased later after writing the article has it removed from the same page. Considering there haven't been any significant new sources for the individual and this one has been removed, I don't oppose deletion unless someone wants to come in and do more research. Illinois2011 (talk) 13:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Businesspeople, and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Faith Adewale

Faith Adewale (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 as sources used do not meet minimum threshold for an entry. And there is the issue of WP: 1E as their notability is tied to their participation in a reality TV show which. Ednabrenze (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Delete People famous as participants of reality shows are not usually notable, also WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: The comments flying around attaching WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA to sources randomly are ridiculous at best. I looked at the sources and find the Bella Naija and Pulse Nigeria ones to lean towards WP:GNG-worthy. This particular article and the comment above is a typical example of how users ridiculously attach WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA to sources randomly. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

  You are right, all the news media cited in the article are listed at WP:RSNG, so WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA does not apply. Nevertheless, he is not notable. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Television, and Medicine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:27, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
• Redirect to Big Brother Naija This appears to be where most of his Notability is from. Agnieszka653 (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: WP:RSNG is not a community-approved resource unlike WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA (which was specifically edited to remove reference to it). In any case, this person is not notable given the sources. 🄻🄰 14:03, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

  Redirect to Big Brother Naija is an acceptable alternative. 🄻🄰 14:04, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Royalnasty

Royalnasty (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. Sources in article are not WP:RS as they are sponsored or featured posts and they are written possible by a single individual. See these[1][2] and here[3][4] are all promotional efforts. Ednabrenze (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Entertainment, and Nigeria. Ednabrenze (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Internet. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
• Leaning Keep- doing spot checks as well as additional searches, seems to lack SIGCOV. though to be fair getting plenty of returns from even casual searches using his persona name(Royalnasty). So may just need better RS sources to count towards notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 11:05, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Comment - I'm not going to weigh in but is anyone else getting a weird vibe from the random appearances of multiple Uganda-based editors, all of whom are writing in a similar style and voting Keep?...... aesurias (talk) 08:32, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Text generated by a large language model or similar AI technology has been collapsed in line with the relevant guideline and should be excluded from assessments of consensus. Rand Freeman 00:01, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

• Keep – The subject meets the notability guidelines through multiple independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage. Additional searches also show sustained public recognition, satisfying SIGCOV and WP:GNG. This assessment is made in line with Wikipedia’s purpose, core content policies, and the Foundation’s Terms of Use. No policy-based reason to delete.--BusyEditor (talk) 08:45, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Comment— Whereas a few articles may appear similar to those cited by the nominator—often a result of third-party blogs copying and reproducing content, which is a common occurrence across many regions—the subject remains independently and sufficiently notable on merit. Coverage in reputable sources and verifiable results in search engines (including Google News) demonstrate significant, reliable, and non-trivial attention, supporting inclusion under Wikipedia’s notability guidelines.--BusyEditor (talk) 09:13, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

• Keep – Whereas this article has been flagged for deletion, I believe it ok to keep it and due fact its a stub, its likely to expanded soon.Macholi (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Note to closing admin: none of the Keep comments provide policy based argument why this article should be kept and the tone of the last two keep above sound similar. Ednabrenze (talk) 05:27, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The first and third keep arguments are not policy-based. The second one is, but does not actually provide any links to any of the alleged coverage, so it is not particularly convincing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. The sources available on Royalnasty are promotional and sponsored. No nonpromotional or independent coverage that I could find. Rand Freeman 23:56, 27 November 2025 (UTC)

Comment It would be good to know more about the existing Nigerian sources + whether they are considered reliable or useful for establishing notability. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 03:35, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - The nominator is judging based on comments. However, Royalnasty's sources are reliable, not promotional. More sources have been added, and they still provide significant coverage. I suggest going through it again. Añtonīo (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

• Keep – The subject meets Wikipedia’s notability rules because there are several independent and reliable news sources that give clear and meaningful coverage. Some small blogs repeat the same stories (which is common), but there is still enough original reporting from good sources to show notability. A Google News search also shows many independent results, for example:
  • Google News: Royalnasty – independent coverage

This shows the subject is notable enough for inclusion. --BusyEditor (talk) 07:40, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. When I did a quick google search about Royalnasty, several news outlets came with him as the subject like Business News Nigeria, Champion newspapers, Daily Trust, The Sun Nigeria and many others. From the Notability guidelines, a topic needs only 2-3 independent and reliable sources to be considered notable which this subject already has. MichealKal (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

  These sources fail WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. 🄻🄰 14:07, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 10:16, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Sources are all promotional WP:NEWSORGNIGERIA. Not a notable individual. 🄻🄰 14:08, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. According to the WP:RSNG list of generally-reliable sources for Nigeria-related information, all the sources cited in the article are reliable except Champion News. The first link quoted by the nom, which is clearly flagged "Featured" seems to have been removed from the article. I'm not sure why the nom stated that the others are sponsored or featured as I'm not seeing any evidence of that. There's enough WP:SIGCOV to keep the article IMHO.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposed deletions

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