- 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 no consensus defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem ( talk) 03:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Raguluthunna Bharatham
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Raguluthunna Bharatham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A non-notable film that does continues to not meet WP:NFP or WP:NFO. Source searches have provided no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources about this film, nor any reviews in said required sources. The sole keep !vote in the previous AfD discussion stated, "looks like there are more Indian sources to add, article is not unduly promotional." However, in a later comment, the user then stated, "... so, I was wrong, it doesn't look like it's covered more in Indian sources after all." North America 1000 04:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 04:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 04:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 09:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Keep--> NFILM has technically boiled down to allotting an article for every film that has got 2 or more reviews across reliable source(s). I do not personally agree with this interpretation and IMHO, we are not competing with IMDB. But that's a story for another day and for now, I will apply the same standards to this film. Running an online-search for sources, we cannot lay our hands on anything. But the broader question is whether is it realistic to expect online reviews of a 92' film or to assume that all Tamil dailies of 92 have been digitized or rational to search for coverage in net-era-publications ( how many films produced this year (with a plethora of hype) will be any mentioned across RS(s) 20 years later?). The film starred two legendary actors and the music was directed by a highly acclaimed artist. In light of that, it's plainly crazy to assume that such a film vanished without making any buzz; flop or not. Systemic Bias and all that. ∯WBG converse 17:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 20:55, 23 January 2019 (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 no consensus defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem ( talk) 03:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Raguluthunna Bharatham
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Raguluthunna Bharatham ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A non-notable film that does continues to not meet WP:NFP or WP:NFO. Source searches have provided no significant coverage in independent, reliable sources about this film, nor any reviews in said required sources. The sole keep !vote in the previous AfD discussion stated, "looks like there are more Indian sources to add, article is not unduly promotional." However, in a later comment, the user then stated, "... so, I was wrong, it doesn't look like it's covered more in Indian sources after all." North America 1000 04:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 04:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 04:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 09:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
- Keep--> NFILM has technically boiled down to allotting an article for every film that has got 2 or more reviews across reliable source(s). I do not personally agree with this interpretation and IMHO, we are not competing with IMDB. But that's a story for another day and for now, I will apply the same standards to this film. Running an online-search for sources, we cannot lay our hands on anything. But the broader question is whether is it realistic to expect online reviews of a 92' film or to assume that all Tamil dailies of 92 have been digitized or rational to search for coverage in net-era-publications ( how many films produced this year (with a plethora of hype) will be any mentioned across RS(s) 20 years later?). The film starred two legendary actors and the music was directed by a highly acclaimed artist. In light of that, it's plainly crazy to assume that such a film vanished without making any buzz; flop or not. Systemic Bias and all that. ∯WBG converse 17:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 ( talk) 20:55, 23 January 2019 (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.