Taran Adarsh: First, because it does not site any Reliable, quality sources (only one cited in which there is no discussion on Subject Taran Adarsh , secondly I searched web also and do not found any Reliable or quality sources which talk about the Subject in depth , and for Wikipedia notability guidelines there should be multiple reliable sources talking about subject in Depth, which is absent in this case.  This user have 4 Million followers on Twitter but having this will not pass Notability on its own without reliable secondary sources.  WikiAnchor10 ( talk ) 20:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Actors and filmmakers ,  and India .  WikiAnchor10 ( talk ) 20:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:23, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - one of the most notable trade analysts and reviewers in India, working for the popular web portal Bollywood Hungama .  His reviews and critical commentary are cited on almost a thousand Wikipedia articles on Hindi films and actor biographies.  Shahid • Talk 2 me 10:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment more sources added.  Shahid • Talk 2 me 13:48, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : What would really help is a source that has extensive coverage of Adarsh, not just a passing mention, quote from one of his reviews or an interview with him.   A couple of strong sources would go a long way to showing notability.  Ravensfire ( talk ) 17:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Ravensfire : I think that a source like "Films: interview with Taran Adarsh" by Hindustan Times is exactly what we call extensive coverage.  An article dedicated to his professional input is no mean thing.  Neither are, in my opinion, a group of books which describe him as a well-known film critic (passing mention or not, the content does matter).  Shahid • Talk 2 me 14:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to see if recent changes help establish notability.  An individual can be all over TV and newspapers but if we don't have articles or books ABOUT them, then it doesn't matter.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:16, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is a bit surprising given how many sources I found that mentioned his reviews, but all the sources in the article and that I could find are passing, hence failing GNG.  C LYDE TALK TO ME / STUFF DONE 00:50, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Rhododendrites.  C LYDE TALK TO ME / STUFF DONE 18:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I can find lots of what they say and sources quoting them but I've failed to find anything much about them and nothing with any depth.  They appear to have a career generating quotes for news-sources.  They appear to fail WP:BIO / WP:NBASIC KylieTastic ( talk ) 17:04, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Very prominent Indian film critic who is linked in a whopping 924 articles.  I've lost count how many articles I've read or reviewed which cites his reviews.  He is cited in books as a "well-known cinema industry critic".  [30] I wouldn't expect him to have much bio information available on him like a lot of critics, the focus is on the films rather than them.  He is also notable as a trade analyst, editor of a magazine, and is cited as such in numerous books, looking in google books.  Makes no sense to delete this. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A search of images shows that a great deal has been written about the subject.  Taran Adarsh – The Indian film critic who has won everyone’s heart is an example.  Aymatth2 ( talk ) 16:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A prominent trade analyst and reviewer of Bollywood films for many years.  He has been cited in many articles and books. -- Dwaipayan ( talk ) 04:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Arguments which focus on the availability of reliable, in-depth source material (or the lack thereof) about this subject would be much more helpful than those which focus on how well-known he is or what he has done, as that is not a notability factor.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Above there's a delete ! vote that begins I can find lots of what they say and sources quoting them .  That's WP:CREATIVE #1.  — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There's a lack of good in-depth sources on this person, with an interview being the only one in the article.   As noted, they are very widely cited in multiple high quality sources for their reviews and thoughts on the film industry.   NCREATIVE#1 is very easily met for this person.   This won't be the longest article, but absolutely merits staying on Wikipedia.  Ravensfire ( talk ) 18:40, 29 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep