User talk:Mushy Yank/Cadavers of the Loom

Archived conversations (from April, 4 2024 onwards); for earlier messages, see User talk:Mushy Yank/Arkive of the Boom and User talk:Mushy Yank/Dark hives of the Gloom.

Well known film, no article due to draft history

Since you have helped me in the past and I know you are of great help, I would like you to know about Draft:Family Star a released film which is not being able to go to main space at the moment. You can control-f my name and see my comment at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_Zolgensma_NOTHERE which is valid. DareshMohan (talk) 20:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

AFDs

Hello, Mushy Yank,

First, I really hate this tilting talk page. It really is annoying and distracting. But that's not why I'm here.

Secondly, I think you might benefit from taking a break from participating in AFD discussions for a while, a few days or even a week. I see you getting very upset by the comments and stances of other editors and greatly invested in the fate of every single article whose deletion discussion you participate in. You can't have that kind of attitude and continue to participate in AFDs to the extent you do, it will just break your heart and wear you out. You need to have a little detachment, realize that even editors you greatly disagree with are trying their best and that some discussions will close the way you want while others don't. I face the fact that I'm responsible for deleting articles that, if it was up to me, I wouldn't delete and keeping other articles that I think are junk. But AFDs are decided by arguments and group consensus and sometimes yours might be a lone voice and be outnumbered by editors who are arguing against your stance who also have valid arguments.

I also have the feeling that I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know. I just see you as an incredibly valuable contributor to AFD discussions and I don't want to see you implode or get a civility block or any other unpleasant outcomes that can happen when editors just have had enough and blow a fuse. It's better to take a time out and return, refreshed days later. I want you around for a long time! Take care. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Liz:. Thank you for your message. All right, if you think it's better, I'll leave Afds; and (de)ProDs) and pages with notability issues by the same token (as they are quite interconnected). Thanks for the advice and concern! Yours,-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

notability

Is this film even notable The Ode? The reception section contains a student review from UCLA. DareshMohan (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan. There was an Afd and various users found it notable, so maybe it is indeed! I'll have a look.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Saw the notability tag on Shariq Hassan. I will add the reviews from his films. DareshMohan (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Relist

I saw the comment on the relist at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silence 2: The Night Owl Bar Shootout. Valid point. I was surprised when The Hindu was thought to be unreliable (if you ask me even The Times of India articles are fine for film production). I feel that other editors have more privileges (and their voice is mainly heard), which oddly may Wikipedia seem communist.

There seems to be a bias, especially if a well known film like The Family Star doesn't get article (India has like 400k ppl who use internet and half of them probably are looking for English version) or if a film that will get reviews is deleted after reviews are written. This comment Even if 1,000 reviews were released, if all of them are just a few sentences, they can't be used. Additionally, paid reviews don't count either is uncalled for. Stuff like this makes me hate it here. DareshMohan (talk) 05:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, I am not sure "communist" is the word! But I agree, that, at times, I am puzzled and disheartened by the way certain articles are treated or very clear guidelines applied or interpreted (and even when you ask, the answer you get, if you receive one, is at best unclear). I still don't understand the comment about your !vote there, for instance. Anyway, that was just a relist, and really not a big problem. So I've decided to consider it's not a big deal; after all, it's only on Wikipedia and the real world still exists. Thanks for your message. Cheers, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

(This discussion is) Off the Record

Hiya! Seen your signature around before :D I'm wondering why you deprodded the article. Was there a source I didn't see or a notability guideline that I overlooked? Anyways feel free to participate in the afd that I've opened and tell me if there's anything I could've done better. Justiyaya 14:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Thor (The Asylum)

Would this be an acceptable time to be bold and WP:BLAR? 2605:B40:13E7:F600:80D4:D0B3:B66:64D9 (talk) 13:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I really have no opinion about that character, sorry, but sure, it can be considered an acceptable edit to BLAR and redirect to a section where the character is mentioned as an alternative to deletion if you think sources are not enough. So, yes, feel free to redirect the page and if you're reverted (that won't be by me) and you still think it really does not deserve a page, take it to Afd. Or you can ask on the TP of the article. Up to you! Thanks.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Unreliable sources

Hello - just a friendly reminder to please avoid adding unreliable references to pages. Thank you for your understanding! —Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello to you too. Thank you for your friendly reminder. But may I ask what sources specifically you happen to have in mind in both diffs and where there is consensus that these sources are considered unreliable? Thank you in advance.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. galaxylollywood.com and pakistanicinema.net are not reliable at all wherehas urdupoint is questionable. Even if there's no consensus or discussion yet, we can use WP:COMMONSENSE in determining their reliability for WP. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 13:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I see. For your complete information, I did not add the ref to Urdupoint (as the diff you provided clearly confirms). So feel free to mention it to anyone who added it. But as it is only, according to you, "questionable" and not unreliable, allow me too to advise you to use common sense. As for the rest of your reply, I am sorry but you would have to come up with something a little bit more substantial next time you wish to open a section called "Unreliable sources" on someone'sTP and "friendly" remind them to "please avoid using unreliable references". At least, if you don't, I think you should change your approach and wording of what you consider to be the issue. Indeed, it seems correct to say that this is just your personal opinion based on nothing in particular. I am therefore not convinced but you can rest assured that, although I disagree with your opinion, I will not remove the tag you added on both (and other) pages. You might want to explain on each article TP what sources in particular you consider dubious, though. That would be helpful. Should you wish to pursue this conversation, may I invite you to do it on the concerned talk page(s)? Thank you.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I apologize if my choice of words seemed inappropriate. And it's not my intention to personally label these sources as unreliable. I'm confident @CNMall41: would agree with me and perhaps they can provide further insight on the matter. But still If you choose not to consider my information, that's entirely up to you. I hold no strong opinions on this matter. Regards! --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:16, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Also I didn't find your edit summary to be particularly respectful either. --—Saqib (talk | contribs) 14:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

ES: My turn to apologise, I don't remember what I wanted to write but "twit" in capitals was absolutely not what I had in mind (my edit summaries are sometimes completely insane for some reason, maybe automated corrections or just typing too hastily, I don't remember what I had in mind but not that and I didn't check, or would have mentioned it to you in advance). Sincerely sorry for that. For the rest, I did not choose "not to consider (any) information" you would have provided. You shared your opinion. I've paid attention, and I left the tag on the page. Again, feel free to ask or ping other users on the concerned page, where discussion of sources is probably more likely to be fruitful.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Lenny & Sid

TV Tropes is not a reliable source. It's a user generated wiki. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 10:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello to you too. Why mention this to me, if I may ask? I didn’t add it to the page.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Helping Hand Barnstar
		For work on international especially Italian, French films. DareshMohan (talk) 08:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot DareshMohan! I appreciate the kind words. Yours, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Pidgin (1997)

Italian film. Can you figure out if this is an 11-minute short film? [1] [2] DareshMohan (talk) 04:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, I couldn't find sources about duration, except the link you sent me. But as it was one of his early films, and given he did other short films later, 11' could be indeed correct.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you find any reliable sources for Scream of the Ants other than [3]. I don't think [4] and [5] are reliable but not sure. DareshMohan (talk) 00:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, I would consider AlternateEnding a review by an expert. But, anyway, GBooks offers at least 4 significant results: De-Westernizing Film Studies - Page 104. Makhmalbaf at Large: The Making of a Rebel Filmmaker - Page 215 ; Persianate Verse and the Poetics of Eastern Internationalism - Page 191 and India Today International - Volume 4, Issues 13-25 - Page 39. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Mushy, thanks for the help. Is the India Today source is referring to the director? Scream Of The Ants ( see film in India , Scream Of The Ants ( see box ) , has had an agonising experience . After an inordinately long wait of 15 years when he finally realised the dream of shooting a film in the coun- try , he ran ... DareshMohan (talk) 06:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes. "After waiting for 15 years, illustrious Iranian filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf finally shoots his first film in India but emerges with the lament that corruption is her greatest enemy"., says the only bit I can access now.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Take a look at Draft:Scream of the Ants and expand it. I wish there was a second reliable review. DareshMohan (talk) 07:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Waqar Zaka

Hello again - Not trying to WP:CANVASS, but I thought I would ask your opinion on this person from Pakistan who's been involved in directing, producing, and creating some TV shows. Do you think they qualify based on NDIRECTOR/NPRODUCER? --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 17:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello Saqib. In fact I had had a look at that page but I didn't read the AfD, because it looked too long and chaotic! And I confess I find it tricky so I didn't vote (:D). There's a lot of coverage quoted, so I think there is a case for notability all in all, if one takes into consideration the presentation by the journalist before the interviews cited, and decides they are secondary sources. On the other hand, this being said,I don't know exactly what he is most notable for, maybe for being a multi-faceted celebrity associated with various notorious episodes, so if one says this falls under WP:ONEVENT, then you have to oppose the guideline multiple times, which may sound a tiny bit absurd. Perhaps his notability remains mostly based on the fact that he was hosting Champions with Waqar Zaka? Maybe a merge should be considered then, but I see the notability of the show is challenged too. So it's a quite tricky one. But, although his chameleon-like career does puzzle, yes, I'd say he looks rather notable to me, personally. Still, I have seen clearer cases of apparently notable actors or directors for which the same type of coverage was dismissed for being sensationalist, not independent enough, unreliable and/or not in-depth. As for WP:NPRODUCER, specifically, he only co-produced one notable show, as far as I can see, so really not sure. This is more a grey/yellow case for WP:ENT or GNG, imv. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

You might have formed an opinion that I'm against Pakistani showbiz articles and are probably wondering why I'm sticking up for Waqar Zaka. You might think I've got some kind of COI or maybe I'm just a superfan. But the fact is this guy is a big deal! Every single legit Pakistani RS labels him as a popular figure. Still can't wrap my head around why someone's so keen on axing his BLP.

For example, DAWN refer him a as a television and social media personality, Pakistan Observer call] him a once a known face in Pakistani showbiz , The Express Tribune states he has a cult following that his show more popular than any other reality show in Pakistan, Samaa TV refer to him as the prominent Pakistani TV host, social media influencer, The Nation says he's a Pakistan's prominent reality TV host, VJ and stunt performer, Daily Times refer to him as a Renowned Pakistani celebrity and the famous television host and stunt performer while The News International says he is One of television’s famed personalities and the list goes on. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Here's an interesting tidbit: even Jimmy Wales once edited his BLP. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 11:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Who's Jimmy Wales? Anyway, as I told you twice above, I do think he looks rather notable as a celebrity, yes, so I am not the one you need to convince here. Best,-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Since the BLP is gone now, may I ask you why there wasn't any support to keep the BLP then if you think he's a notable figure. I mean I've seen your efforts to save articles related to Pakistani showbiz, which is commendable, but why not keep vote on the Zaka's BLP. Just trying to understand the reasoning behind it. Thanks! —Saqib (talk I contribs) 18:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Support from me, you mean? I didn't vote K or R because my !vote would have almost certainly been considered the result of votestacking, although you mentioned it was not your intent to be canvassing (but you assume from my recent !votes, as you say, that I generally !vote Keep and your message might have been deemed inappropriate and biased) which would not have served nor you nor the page, imv. The page was deleted? Feel free to expand the page about Champions with Waqar Zaka, then. They are evidently closely connected and I think a paragraph about WZ would be appropriate. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

No - I wasn't expecting your keep vote after my comment on your tp. I was hoping for it before I started THIS thread, especially since you mentioned you were aware of this AfD and you felt he was a notable figure. Anyways, I'll drop this topic now as this AfD draw some unwanted negative attention towards me. And I'm not really looking to expand on this article. I'm not particularly interested in these kinds of articles. It's just that I recently started doing NPP and somehow, I've had to deal with showbiz related topics. --—Saqib (talk I contribs) 19:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll rephrase/repeat: I had had a rapid look at that page and found it tricky, took a glance at the Afd and found it looked long and chaotic (so I didn't even read it). Then you came and kindly asked me for my opinion. I took the time to reply after having done some further searching and found that he looked rather notable after all, since that was your question. You replied (without thanks but with various assumptions), and presented me sources. What were they for, since I had said I found him rather notable? I'm not sure.

If he had been an actor, I might have done some searching in the first place and !voted but I saw he was not, and was a host/celebrity, who did not seem obviously notable, and as I did not have time nor interest to dig any further then, I didn't search (and therefore didn't !vote). Had he been a real actor, even then, I don't !vote on all pages about actors, or series or films. I had no time nor interest, that's why. I voted on many Afds recently and mentioned, to you, that it took me more time than I wished. I am not certain why I have to explain this. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to explain things. And allow me to clarify that I shared the source earlier today on this tp, after seeing your comments. My aim wasn't to sway you into voting to keep the BLP. I simply wanted to highlight that if Pakistani RS recognize this guy as a significant figure, then what's up with folks trying to delete the BLP. —Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Semmalar Annam

Despite having interview sources, she doesn't feel notable. All of her sources simply mention her short films and her role in Ammani (supporting role). Out of the twenty-so films that she acted in almost all of them are minor roles. Minor meaning a level below supporting sometimes having no dialogues at all (other such actors don't have articles). For supporting roles only having many (like a ton) could potentially make her notable. DareshMohan (talk) 07:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, she received 2 awards in 2021but they could be considered minor (and Sennai has no page). The first article in The Hindu , although presenting an interview contains a few elements that might count; but the rest is imv not enough indeed. What I suggest is to redirect to Ammani because that's what she was noted for (that has a page). Draft might be an option. It's a pity because it's clean but WPNACTOR/ DIRECTOR are not met and GNG, neither, apparently. User:Greenbangalore, who created a page, might know. If another of her roles is significant enough and in a "blue" film, the page could be kept as such (but that might challenged). For example, if Sennai can be considered notable (https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/tamil/movies/news/jaikumar-sedhuramans-sennai-wins-big-at-nepal-film-fest/articleshow/88371149.cms) or sources back the claim it"s notable, because her role has received awards (although minor) that prove it"s significant. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I voted as speedy keep. I feel that we both made mistakes (mine was the edit conflict where I mentioned those 2 roles here at the same time you responded). I could have simply again asked before nominating but I only knew more about the two roles after writing so much in the deletion discussion. I was unsure about redirecting because I thought articles (or only film articles?) can be redirected if they are not 90 days or older. To not make the article deletion entirely pointless, can you work on improving the article? Would you support modifying her filmography to show lead roles and minor roles in different tables or rather independent films and noon-Independent films separately. I can add a Reference column and try to cite the roles. DareshMohan (talk) 18:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll try! Thank you for your understanding. Yours,-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		If at all I'm a good, good faith editor, it is thanks to you. Plus, you rekindled my interest to do more international cinema. :) DareshMohan (talk) 06:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this very touching message; very honoured by what you say. And always glad to receive a barnstar! :D. Yours, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Clarification

Just wanting to learn policy.

In straightforward cases (e.g., blatant vandalism), the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion.

Is speedy keep a straightforward case? It probably is just confirming.

I should have just Procedure for non-administrator close (nominator withdrawal). Closed the deletion myself. I didnt know about that. DareshMohan (talk) 12:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, thank you for your concern. I was involved in the editing and AfD, true, but I thought the close was pretty uncontroversial and as you had indicated to close as SK, I decided to take it on me and ignore the rule. If you want to undo it and close it yourself, feel free! (I think it would be a bit bureaucratic but no worries). I just didn't want other users to waste time on this and the page to be marked with an undue notice any longer. But you're right I should have added in my closing statement something like: "I am involved but decided to ignore the letter of the rule". Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

No problem! It wasn't worth other users time and I should be careful when nominating articles. Plus, I could have closed it myself.

P. S. How do I learn more about Wikipedia policies, do I just sit down and read them? DareshMohan (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

That's a good question. You can just read them, yes. Talk pages of Guidelines and their history are also interesting to understand why they are what they are and how they were discussed and implemented. For example, I remember a guideline or was it a policy? that went "VERIFIABILITY NOT TRUTH". I always found it was misleading and always disliked it, and disagreed with the way it was phrased and applied. Eventually, it was "rephrased" and downgraded to an essay and footnote. This kind of things gives you food for thought. It's a bit like the way NEWSORGINDIA or WP:NACTOR are interpreted sometimes. One day, it will probably be clarified. Maybe not in a way that I agree with (for instance, another example would be the notability of pornographic artists on Wikipedia: it is subject to a rather recent decision that basically makes them non-notable for being what they are; I don't mind and maybe it's all for the good of readers and contributors, but I think it's unfair). But If you're bold, you'll probably break rules at some point and then someone will let you know you did. Also, I am pretty sure you know the core policies; and when common sense and decency guide your action, it's very likely that what you do is positive. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Notability

Check the notability of Draft:Jai Varma, who starred as solo lead in two films (Image, Theekuchi) and group lead (one of five lead members in Naam). Here a user removed several reviews citing them as unreliable although Sify has a wiki link [6]. So, reviews without wiki links such as Chennai Online are unreliable? Malini Mannath of that company writes for The New Indian Express. DareshMohan (talk) 23:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Jeraxmoira is misguided. I don't see why Chennai Online shouldn't be used. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello to you both, I don't think there's any guideline that says that a newspaper or periodical needs to be notable enough to have a page to be considered reliable. Many local papers don't have a WP page but are acceptable, I think, while the New York Post or the Daily Mail are notable (and of course do have a page) but are considered notoriously unreliable. IndiaGlitz and Behindwoods are in general not great but not plainly unreliable, I'd say. JV seems more than notable enough. I'll move it!-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

The noticeboard for reliable sources has a few threads about IndiaGlitz, including this one, also about Sify. Unless the removal of those refs, is, again, NEWSORGINDIA applied for reasons that are not clear to me, potentially to every periodical or site from the Subcontinent. Asking User:Jeraxmoira is the best way to know. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:02, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

In some instances where people try to add reviews about artists or technicians from the Indian film industry as well as in the Cinema of the United States, they do not include reviews from unknown reviewers, especially without a byline (which also falls under routine coverage). Instead, they add appreciations or praises from renowned people in the same industry or at least a film critic with their own Wikipedia page. The Indian media pumps out articles about anything they find relevant in their stream. By desperately adding low-quality reviews, you are only lessening the quality of an article. IMO, if Ekta Khosla has enough significant roles to pass NACTOR, then the reviews are not needed in the first place. Either way, those low-quality reviews will not stand a chance in an AfD. I need a diff/link to check what's on Chennai Online. Cheers Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. desperately adding low-quality reviews is certainly not what any of us wishes, I hope. I agree with you that significant roles in notable films are enough for any actor to pass the applicable guideline requirements for notability. However, some users "desperately" insist that "SIGCOV" should ALSO be provided; that may explain why, to prevent endless discussions, some so-so coverage is sometimes added; but again, I agree and I am sure anyone can only agree that, when it's not needed for verification, a page might be better off without a disputable quality coverage, if everyone is truly honest about what the guideline says, that is. Anyway, this seems to confirm that one cannot consider IndiaGlitz nor Behindwoods or Sify are deprecated and that they might be used when it seems necessary at the user's discretion, or at least that a consensus should be reached on the TP of the concerned page about whether particular articles or reviews should or could be used. Thanks again. Best,-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

When you start enabling this practice, the interested parties will pay the reviewers to add a snippet about them in the review. This is why only high-quality reviews or reviews from renowned critics are used. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 10:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you check the notability of Draft:Desiya Paravai and Draft:Image (film). The latter film had a review by bbthots.com [7], which although may be considered unreliable, films with 2 reviews were considered article worthy from the early 2000s due to lack of sources for such non-English films. Other films with a production source and a review from Chennai Online have articles. Either way, that film is likely not notable but the former film Desiya Paravai seems to be notable despite lack of sources. The film was in production since 1997, features a popular song and a notable cast. If a Kalki review was added, it could be notable. DareshMohan (talk) 22:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan,

2 articles from the same periodical by the same critic for Image: it could be challenged although the 2 articles are quite substantial. Desiya Paravai has a tiny line in TV guide. You could move them to Main, if you don't mind potential tagging/asking for a second review, but at least a redirect to the list of Tamil films of their respective years seems warranted, where the review can be added as ref, if that really happens. I can't find anything in books online....-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I took your word for it and only moved Desiya Paravai after finding a source where someone compiled various newspapers together [8] (ctrl-f Naan Oru Indhiyan) and left Image as is. DareshMohan (talk) 23:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Just learnt that Jai Varma played the lead role in [9] another film. Now that adds notability. It is always nice to clear the doubt after learning that an actor acted in more films than previously thought. DareshMohan (talk) 05:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Can you check the notability of Draft:Visweswara Rao. He played minor roles in several films and known roles with some duration in Bala Bharatam and Pithamagan. All his sources came from the fact that he died. DareshMohan (talk) 07:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello DareshMohan, coverage allows verification that he played a LOT of minor roles (I didn't check them all but some seem less minor than other :D) so yes he does meet WP:NACTOR, that states, "The person has made unique,prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment."Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC) Sorry, I tried to use Refill to format the bare urls but didn't manage. I'll try later. In only did archive the links

Check Draft:Kottachi (rejected via AfC). He also plays minor roles: one amongst other in comedic troupes in films. Most sources are about him getting arrested, depressed due to Vivek's death (which allowed for the creation of Cell Murugan article, which previously had no online sources) and about struggles. He is probably notable now since he directed a film and played the lead role in it [10].

Also check Draft:Chappale. Viggy is not considered reliable since all content on the website are written by one person unlike Chitraloka.com. Entire draft survives on a single Sify review, of which the link only states a sentence from the review. DareshMohan (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, my browser does not let me open any Viggy page. But as for Kottachi, he is clearly prolific and that's verifiable, and I find some mildly significant coverage in your sources. Not sure the page was really not that different at the 2nd decline but the first decline is a bit unfair (significant is not always lead, and the guideline considers prolific creators as a possible pass), I find. Have you contacted the reviewers? Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I have archived the Viggy links and added the contents to my sandbox. Regarding Draft:Kottachi, I gave up on it earlier but now it looks article-worthy. Worst case scenario if Kottachi is still a draft after this discussion (User_talk:DreamRimmer#Draft:Kottachi), you could review it but I don't know if that you are an Wikipedia:Articles for creation reviewer. If I hadn't put the AfC tag on the draft, I could have moved it myself but I had no idea till today that he directed a film. DareshMohan (talk) 00:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

No, I am not a reviewer. But "An article created in draftspace (...) any other user may edit, move, rename, redirect, merge, or seek deletion of any draft." says the information page. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Can you find any good sources for Kuntilanak 2 (2007), not the recent 2019 one. Add sources to my sandbox. I feel like creating an article for the 2019 one (since it has proper sourcing) at Kuntilanak 2, would be problematic because the article for the 2007 doesn't exist and viewers would expect to be reading about that one and not the 2019 one (remake version). DareshMohan (talk) 07:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I've left a note to User:78.26 and requested the original text of the deleted page. Will also leave some toys in your sandbox too (:D).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:55, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Wait, who is 78.26? how were you able to find the creator of the original page, I already messaged User talk:JzG. DareshMohan (talk) 08:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah sorry, I didn't know you had messaged JzG. 78.26 is an administrator, listed among those willing to provide texts of deleted pages to users who wish to work on them for some reason. He has no connection with the original article. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, a ton. I'm busy in real life at the moment and will reFill the detikhot sources. I removed the passing mentions because I wanted to add notability by adding sources from 2007 when the film was made. I can handle the draft from now. DareshMohan (talk) 19:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for taking too much time but Wikipedia:There is no deadline. DareshMohan (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to help with the last two Kuntilanak articles. Firstmost, do you feel that there is enough sources for the third film? DareshMohan (talk) 05:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, K3 (2022) on the Indonesian WP has 2 sources and mentions an award nomination, with what you have, it's not much but might be enough. And again, if someone thinks it's not, they should redirect it...-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For all the work you do at AFD Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I appreciate.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)