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 Delete. The only notability reliable sources seem to credit him with is as an unashamed self-publicist. If he continues, he may gain notability for making awful movies, but he is not up there with Ed Wood yet. Spinning Spark 17:22, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Powerstar Srinivasan

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable person, fails WP:ACTOR, looks like WP:OR and sources are possible fan sites I'm not sure. JayJay^{Talk to me} 19:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Starring in your own Youtube videos and then self-producing a film doesn't make you notable. I got a laugh about the film "being showed in theaters for more than 250 continues days". Apparently there's one theater that's been running a noon showing for that long, with some people saying that he paid the theater to run the empty showings. Also, edit warring to redirect Power star to this page suggests that the page is promotional. ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The movie he starred may be mokkai. But he is famous in Tamil media. So it is better to change the article type or content. There is no need for deletion of this article. Thank you --117.206.133.104 (talk) 15:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He's now a popular person in Tamil media. Even though he has not acted well in film, he became popular and many people want to know about him. It's better not to delete this page.115.248.166.162 (talk) 13:01, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google news search returns zero results. Even I can beat that. ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I went through all the references provided (having failed to find any further reliable sources) and this material all looks pretty much like fan-generated -- or self-generated -- content. I am aware of a couple of sources of reliable information about Tamil cinema and this hasn't been discussed on any of them that I can find (non-English spelling is an issue for me but I've tried a couple of different ways and found nothing). As noted by Adjwilley above, the lack of results in Google news is remarkable; this individual seems to have negative publicity value even as a joke, which I considered. Ubelowme (talk) 18:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Although I don't regard the source as reliable, this article [1] notes that the subject is known for "cheap marketing efforts"; given the notes above with respect to edit warring on a redirect, I thought it was worth mentioning here in that it's possible this is another attempt to self-promote. Also the article notes that these films are self-published, as it were, which confers no notability. Ubelowme (talk) 19:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Make the article to speak the truth. Removing the self promoting stuffs and providing true fact is sufficient instead of deleting this. Also try searching with tamil letters பவர் ஸ்டார். It gives back the results from tamil media websites. 49.206.133.144 (talk) 19:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I can't read Tamil, but I found [2] through a Google News search of the Tamil-alphabet name provided by 49.206.133.144, and put it through Google Translate. It seems reliable, but I can't tell for sure because I have no familiarity with oneindia.in. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 20:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I also did the Gooogle news search (24 results) and stumbled across that same page. I didn't really get anything from the translation, but it looks borderline to me. Note how the first and last paragraphs end with exclamation marks: "Dr. Srinivasan to bring star power to himself as a publicity again!" and "Star Power!" (or more likely "Power Star!") I'm not saying that exclamation marks in a news story disqualify it as a reliable source, but it does make me skeptical. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Also, note that the two IP's who voted Keep (115.248.166.162 and 49.206.133.144) are from the same city. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Dynamic IPs are pretty common in some parts of the world. I don't know if those two IP addressses are from such a region, but nothing sinister should be assumed about that. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 20:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - I assumed that it was the same person editing in good faith from home one day and work/school/whatever the next day, and that they didn't know not to vote again after it was relisted. ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Just to note that a GNews search of "Dr. Srinivasan" turns up a few possibly RS English-language sources relating this film auteur (in addition to a number of hits about unrelated people).[3][4][5]--Arxiloxos (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I did not search for Dr. Srinivasan and this is a more useful result (thank you Arxiloxos). I am unable to assess the reliability of these sources, although like Adjwilley I am skeptical, given their tone and content, but at least they are in English. As Arxiloxos notes, the gentleman is an auteur and I tend to regard such efforts as self-publishing (which attracts no notability) unless they achieve the level of cultural penetration of, say, Woody Allen. As an aside, it struck me that there seems to be an air of Florence Foster Jenkins about the subject's efforts. Ubelowme (talk) 21:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Deccan Chronicle is reliable in context to what is being sourced, and IndiaGlitz, though lacking an article, is genrerally accepted as suitable for sourcing articles on Indian film and actors. Do not be too concerned with their style and prose though, as it seems that it is sinply the way they choose to report news. Its a regional/national thing. Even Times of India offers articles written in a similar manner. What is important to us is that any such source offers information which, no matter the original's prose choice, can be presented here in an encyclopdic manner. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:17, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning Keep – topic appears to at least meet WP:GNG per:

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've thought some more about this, and while admitting my cultural ignorance, I am having a hard time accepting IndiaGlitz as a reliable source. I did some searching today to try to find out something about them, and I came up with nothing. Their articles don't have authors listed, the website doesn't have any "about us" explanation, there's no Wikipedia article on them, and they aren't mentioned by any reputable news agencies that I can find. I sampled a few other articles that were being featured on the site today and they're garbage (in my opinion). Would anybody in their right mind consider using this article as a source to say that Jennifer Lopez feels "insecure"? And this is just promotional gossip. Will fans really "go ooh la la" and "find themselves weak in their knees"?

In terms of WP:RS, calling IndiaGliltz a News organization would be a stretch. It seems to be entirely self-published primary opinion that can't even be attributed to a single author. To use this as a source in a Wikipedia article is really scraping the sludge at the bottom of the barrel; given our higher standards for BLP articles, I don't think it should be used as a source at all here. ~Adjwilley (talk) 18:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As Adjwilley said there is no Wikipedia article on the name of IndiaGlitz , but it doesn't mean that its fake. Not all websites has an wikipedia article. This IndiaGlitz was used as reference source in hundreds of wikipedia articles. Gossips are quite common because of their profession. Can OneIndia.in can be considered as reliable source? If so then have a look here about him and is upcoming movies here : http://popcorn.oneindia.in/artist-comments/20319/1/dr-srinivasan.html and a news about him which came today in same OneIndia : http://tamil.oneindia.in/movies/television/2012/06/power-star-srinivasan-vs-gobinath-155530.html. This news is about his participation as guest in Neeya Naana program of STAR Vijay channel. I am not denying the fact that he self-promoted himself earlier but now has become famous because of that, so nothing wrong in keeping an wikipedia article on his name.115.248.166.162 (talk) 09:19, 12 June 2012 (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.