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. While numerically similar, the Delete arguments carry significantly more P&G weight than the Keeps. Owen× ☎ 13:56, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mubeen Gabol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

There are a lot of passing mentions, but it lacks direct and in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 18:26, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Pakistan. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: meets WP:NACTOR for his significant roles in two notable films, Kataksha and Lafangey, coverage about those films allowing verification of that. -Mushy Yank. 22:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You have to prove his significant roles with secondary sources. Just saying he meets WP:NACTOR is not enough. Gheus (talk) 13:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  1) I am not "just saying he meets WP:NACTOR" (and you first sentence perfectly proves it btw). 2) a) He is one of the four lead actors in Lafangay and denying it is almost bizarre....https://tribune.com.pk/story/2363729/lafangay-trailer-four-nobodies-navigate-through-horrors-of-life And that role is significant despite comments below stating the contrary; https://images.dawn.com/news/1190445....b) The poster in the Dawn review (mentioned below..https://www.dawn.com/news/1491129 which mentions ONLY one actor and indicates that acting as a whole was poor (so that the absence of the name of Gabol there is not relevant.) lists him among the 5 main actors of Kataksha .....(Also see https://dailytimes.com.pk/392781/pakistans-first-psychological-horror-film-kataksha-to-release-on-june-21/ (NB- sourced provided not for GNG but to verify his role is significant). So, yes, this is a NACTOR pass (didn't even check his other roles) and I am not just saying it. Thank you. -Mushy Yank. 10:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If you are going to compare a possible press release with the byline 'Staff Report', published before the film's release, against a reliable movie review from Dawn, written by a bylined author, and use the press release to claim that Mubeen Gabol had a significant role, then you are simply bad at evaluating sources. If his role were significant, it would have been discussed in the review. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure, if you say so. But try to refrain from making hostile personal comments, thank you. -Mushy Yank. 21:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per Mushy Yank. Behappyyar (talk) 19:39, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:30, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree that there is enough coverage for this to be kept. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 09:54, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as per ScrabbleTiles. Timtim76 (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: My WP:BEFORE shows only passing mentions in multiple press releases confirming his involvement in various shows and films but nothing more than that. There should be something to write about Mubeen Gabol to justify a separate article. If the intent is merely to list his filmography, IMDb already serves that purpose.

The in-depth review by Dawn about Kataksha states,

In Kataksha, the film’s four characters don’t care about anything—much like writer-director Abu Aleeha, who doesn’t care about the story.

The four characters do not include the subject, nor is Mubeen Gabol mentioned anywhere else in the review, indicating that he did not have a significant role. Also worth noting that many television shows do not list his name in the cast section and the fact that there are three votes above that are not based on any P&G seems questionable.

My stance would change if anyone can provide at least one good, reliable source with significant coverage of the subject. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree with Jeraxmoira. No significant coverage on the career of the subject and no coverage on if any roles the subject played were lead roles or significant. Only 1 source on the page on the film Kataksha, where subject's name is mentioned just as an entry. Fails to meet WP:NACTOR and because of no reliable sources on the page with any significant coverage on the subject, page also fails WP:GNG. If anyone finds multiple reliable sources with significant coverage on the career and roles (if significant) of the subject, I might change the vote. RangersRus (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note to closer: please kindly check my reply above.-Mushy Yank. 10:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC) [And please note the personal attack that followed].-Mushy Yank. 12:42, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[And the extremely hostile and threatening one that followed (and was deleted after 20 minutes.). Thank you.-Mushy Yank. 01:35, 5 March 2025 (UTC)][reply]

I removed it because I saw your comments on another Afd. scope_creep^Talk 08:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note to Closer. Timtim76 is a very suspicious voter who has been on Wikipedia since Oct 5, 2023 but only made 6 edits and all those on AFDs for Pakistan topic on Feb 24. Sock likely? RangersRus (talk) 13:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• RangersRus, if you have questions about sockpuppetry, it's best to raise them at WP:SPI rather than WP:AFD. It could be seen as a personal attack since you have only stated your suspicions, no evidence. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry about that Liz. I have no evidence. Will such editors still be considered someone who have made few edits outside of this AFD ? RangersRus (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @RangersRus: rest assured that AfD closers look at these things and take them into account when closing. The best way you can help us is by tagging such !votes with the {{subst:spa}} template. Thanks! Owen× ☎ 18:15, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No indication of significance for a WP:BLP. A before found nothing. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NACTOR, WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 23:30, 4 March 2025 (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.