- 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 keep. The article will be moved to List of AVA Productions films next. ( non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 01:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- AVA Productions ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of notability. Lacking proper WP:RS. Zackmann08 ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 17:33, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as I'm finding mentions but that's it, no actual substance for its own convincing article and there's nothing to be expected for inheriting it by simply being involving with other people and things. SwisterTwister talk 03:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a list article and change title to List of AVA Productions films. Its products (many productions) are themselves sourcable as having won notable awards. Lacking use of available sources does not mean a topic fails, and SOURCES are available for that assertion of notability. WP:INHERIT is to be avoided if there was no logical supportive argument. Succinctly, if there was no production company there would be no films and no awards. Schmidt, Michael Q. 05:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- User talk:MichaelQSchmidt's arguments here make sense and are sound when looking at this objectively. GreenMountainGate ( talk) 19:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a list article and move it to List of AVA Productions films. There are enough blue links to justify a list article. On sourcing issue: I adopt the above rationale (can repeat the same in my own words, if anyone want to). Anup [Talk] 08:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- an unremarkable production company that lacks sufficient RS to establish notability. I don't see a point in renaming to List of AVA Productions films as it would be WP:LISTCRUFT since the production company is non notable itself. K.e.coffman ( talk) 05:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- While it is fine that you choose to use a negtive essay as an argument, some others may believe MOS:LIST's WP:LISTPURP is the better means to evaluate how to properly share a list f notable topics when nowhere else is suitable . Schmidt, Michael Q. 15:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Very strong Keep - This is another black and white case to me. The company has won prestigious national awards (there is independent 3rd party proof of that from multiple sources), what more is there to say?? The article is sufficiently referenced with solid sources, but a quick google search shows there are lots more references available to support the topic. GreenMountainGate ( talk) 19:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock. MER-C 13:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - This page should not be deleted as AVA productions is a notable production company in south India. The company has produced quite a number of movies and some of them have received national awards as well (the same can be validated with the sources listed - http://www.worldlibrary.org/articles/kerala_state_film_award_for_best_film, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-kerala/adayalangal-wins-state-awards-for-best-malayalam-feature-film-best-director/article1235868.ece, etc). Not sure why this page got marked for 'speedy deletion'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sureshkajal ( talk • contribs) (UTC)
- Note that "worldlibrary.org" is a Wikipedia mirror. Kuru (talk) 16:55, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment -- My reading of MOS:LIST is that it's not necessary to combine notable topics under an umbrella of a non notable one -- the only thing these entries would have in common would be the non notable production company. K.e.coffman ( talk) 19:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - None of the Keep comments have actually shown how, when, where and why we can finally improve this article. SwisterTwister talk 20:36, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I had quite plainly above in case you missed reading it.. and the article's content is far better sourced than many list articles. Schmidt, Michael Q. 11:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 04:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Care to explain your comment of WP:JNN? Since others have described how and why after a renaming it IS notable enough under WP:LISTPURP, your claiming the opposite is kinda empty. Thanks. Schmidt, Michael Q. 11:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic Nightfury 07:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic Nightfury 07:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep as a list article and change title to List of AVA Productions films. Its productions are themselves easily sourcable and have won notable awards. Remember,no production house=no films! Aru@baska ❯❯❯ Vanguard 16:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 keep. The article will be moved to List of AVA Productions films next. ( non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 ( talk, contribs) 01:26, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- AVA Productions ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No indication of notability. Lacking proper WP:RS. Zackmann08 ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 17:33, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:31, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as I'm finding mentions but that's it, no actual substance for its own convincing article and there's nothing to be expected for inheriting it by simply being involving with other people and things. SwisterTwister talk 03:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a list article and change title to List of AVA Productions films. Its products (many productions) are themselves sourcable as having won notable awards. Lacking use of available sources does not mean a topic fails, and SOURCES are available for that assertion of notability. WP:INHERIT is to be avoided if there was no logical supportive argument. Succinctly, if there was no production company there would be no films and no awards. Schmidt, Michael Q. 05:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
- User talk:MichaelQSchmidt's arguments here make sense and are sound when looking at this objectively. GreenMountainGate ( talk) 19:18, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as a list article and move it to List of AVA Productions films. There are enough blue links to justify a list article. On sourcing issue: I adopt the above rationale (can repeat the same in my own words, if anyone want to). Anup [Talk] 08:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 11:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- an unremarkable production company that lacks sufficient RS to establish notability. I don't see a point in renaming to List of AVA Productions films as it would be WP:LISTCRUFT since the production company is non notable itself. K.e.coffman ( talk) 05:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- While it is fine that you choose to use a negtive essay as an argument, some others may believe MOS:LIST's WP:LISTPURP is the better means to evaluate how to properly share a list f notable topics when nowhere else is suitable . Schmidt, Michael Q. 15:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Very strong Keep - This is another black and white case to me. The company has won prestigious national awards (there is independent 3rd party proof of that from multiple sources), what more is there to say?? The article is sufficiently referenced with solid sources, but a quick google search shows there are lots more references available to support the topic. GreenMountainGate ( talk) 19:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)Blocked sock. MER-C 13:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - This page should not be deleted as AVA productions is a notable production company in south India. The company has produced quite a number of movies and some of them have received national awards as well (the same can be validated with the sources listed - http://www.worldlibrary.org/articles/kerala_state_film_award_for_best_film, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-kerala/adayalangal-wins-state-awards-for-best-malayalam-feature-film-best-director/article1235868.ece, etc). Not sure why this page got marked for 'speedy deletion'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sureshkajal ( talk • contribs) (UTC)
- Note that "worldlibrary.org" is a Wikipedia mirror. Kuru (talk) 16:55, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment -- My reading of MOS:LIST is that it's not necessary to combine notable topics under an umbrella of a non notable one -- the only thing these entries would have in common would be the non notable production company. K.e.coffman ( talk) 19:00, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - None of the Keep comments have actually shown how, when, where and why we can finally improve this article. SwisterTwister talk 20:36, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I had quite plainly above in case you missed reading it.. and the article's content is far better sourced than many list articles. Schmidt, Michael Q. 11:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Not notable Sportsfan 1234 ( talk) 04:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Care to explain your comment of WP:JNN? Since others have described how and why after a renaming it IS notable enough under WP:LISTPURP, your claiming the opposite is kinda empty. Thanks. Schmidt, Michael Q. 11:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic Nightfury 07:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nordic Nightfury 07:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep as a list article and change title to List of AVA Productions films. Its productions are themselves easily sourcable and have won notable awards. Remember,no production house=no films! Aru@baska ❯❯❯ Vanguard 16:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- 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.