On 3/5/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/5/06, guru brahma wikibra@yahoo.co.in wrote:
The message below has set me thinking about an article I had nominated for deletion sometime back, [[Taran Adarsh]]. He is a film critic, widely loved and hated in the online community and his reviews are picked up and amplified by several blogs. He gets 35,000 hits on google but none of the first 100 hits has anything except his name - some of them have opinions about him but none of them have any biographical data. The afd closed as no consensus to delete, because people say that the no. of hits implies notability. Even if that is taken as a measure of notability, the article does not contain anything related to the biographical data of the person as no such information appears to be available easily and the person remains non-verifiable. Any thoughts on how to deal with such issues??
Perhaps, like with Brian Peppers, the biographical information is not relevant to the article? If his reviews are widely disseminated, is discussion of the reviews and opinions of the person enough? We don't have a lot of biographical details on Shakespeare, or probably lots of other famous historical figures, but that's not a problem, if their contributions are well known and notable.
Yeah, I don't understand the logic here, that someone would nominate for deletion an entry on a person they themselves describe as "widely loved and hated in the online community and his reviews are picked up and amplified by several blogs."