Would you mind explaining how the subject fails WP:N and WP:V? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:11, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira The draft document failed twice. Also, I only see a single verified source about the subject per WP:ICTFSOURCES, and that source does not cover enough to publish it as a document. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 05:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The evaluation of a draft has no weightage over red links. The single verifiable source you mentioned is sufficient as the subject has played a major role in co-creating a collective body of work i.e. his filmography, see WP:CREATIVE #4.

For WP:V, you can verify the same on the respective film articles. His collective body of work has been the primary subject of multiple independent reviews. Here is an example. Let me know if you need more reviews to verify.

W.r.t Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, it does not violate any of the sections listed on WP:BLP. There is nothing controversial or challengeable here, so unless you have other concerns, please add the red link back. Cheers Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 06:55, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira If the information is sufficient, why not publish the article and link the subject to it instead of providing a red link? I have no objection to creating a new article, but people often add red links, and they remain there indefinitely. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 07:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that the purpose of red links? To indicate that sooner or later an article will be created about a likely notable person or topic by any interested contributor. It doesn't matter if it exists indefinitely as no one is on a timeline here, unless the article is full of red links, which messes with the readability. FWIW, the version you saw on WP:REDBIO has been reverted, as it was added by a sock without prior consensus. Either way, I have a separate draft here. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira Then what's stopping you from publishing it? Anoop Bhatia (talk) 07:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because I am still working on it. How does publishing an article relevant to your decision to remove the red links? Unless you have any policy grounds apart from the notability concerns which were addressed above, please revert your edit on 9th South Indian International Movie Awards and November Story. Unless you think that Wikipedia should not have any coverage on this subject, you are violating the editing guideline here. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira Draft:Vidhu Ayyanna was declined by three reviewers for various reasons. This suggests that the subject may not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. If you find this assessment contradictory, you should either prove the subject's notability by publishing the article yourself, since you are a page reviewer, or make the necessary changes to the article and call for a review. Anoop Bhatia (talk) 08:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As this is not a content disagreement, are you okay if we get an unofficial third opinion on this? The editor I have in mind is User:Robert McClenon, who seems to have worked extensively on Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeraxmoira I have no issues. If two or more people accept that your sources meet Wikipedia's verifiability standards on the subject, why should I object? Anoop Bhatia (talk) 09:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon. Would you be kind enough to provide an unofficial third opinion on Whether to add a red link of a likely notable person to an article? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:43, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]