- 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. As always leniency is always given to Indian subjects (Ie films, shows, BLPs etc etc) as unlike UK/US sourcing for indian stuff's alot harder to find, Anyway overall consensus is to keep. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 00:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
SaadeyCMSaab
- SaadeyCMSaab ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable film, not even released yet. No claim of notability Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 13:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Alts:
- proper spelling:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- director:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actress:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actor:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actor:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- producer:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- music:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- WP:INDAFD: "Saadey CM Saab" "Vipin Parashar" "Kashish Singh" "Harbhajan Mann" "Sumeet Singh Manchanda" "Avishek Majumder" "Gurpreet Ghuggi"
- Keep per meeting WP:NFF (paragraph 3). As topic notability is through the availability of sources (even if not currently used), no article ever has to make a claim "I am notable". The stub article already has sources which tell us filming has commenced with lead actor Harbhajan Mann, and a little BEFORE tells us its production HAS coverage to meet WP:GNG and that its release date is next month on October 30. It serves the project and its readers for this stub to be expanded over time and through regular editing using the available sources. Yes the current stub is a poorly sourced, but so what? When a film topic meets WP:NFF (paragraph 3), we do not delete it... we fix it. Sorry Jimfbleak but we look first, determine if the topic is notable and not judge it for being WP:IMPERFECT, and then we allow it to remain and be improved over time and through use of the many available sources. One editors opinion. Schmidt, Michael Q. 21:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Schmidt, , to me, that amounts to saying that all films (and by implication books and recordings) can have an article, even if not released at the time of posting, as long as they have some sort of reference to someone or something that already has an article. That interpretation of para 3 seems to rely on notability by association, which isn't normally acceptable. Not my understanding of the notability guidelines at all. Presumably your interpretation also applies to people (X's father was famous, so X gets an article as long as he can find a ref or two?) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- @ Jimfbleak: Please do not misstate or misinterpret or WP:WAX my arguments. Simply put, I pay attention to community consensus that created MOS:FILM#production and WP:NFF and WP:GNG, and understand that (no matter where it is being shot) IF a film project has entered filming (many never do) and ITS production receives coverage to meet WP:GNG (many never do) it may merit an article before release. I believe this filming project meets inclusion guides enough to be expanded per available sources to serve our readers. You (apparently) do not, and that's okay. Thank you. Schmidt, Michael Q. 07:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Schmidt, Michael Q. 09:16, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Agree with argumentation as presented by MichaelQSchmidt, above. Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 16:38, 18 September 2015 (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. As always leniency is always given to Indian subjects (Ie films, shows, BLPs etc etc) as unlike UK/US sourcing for indian stuff's alot harder to find, Anyway overall consensus is to keep. ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 00:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
SaadeyCMSaab
- SaadeyCMSaab ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable film, not even released yet. No claim of notability Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 13:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Alts:
- proper spelling:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- director:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actress:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actor:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- actor:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- producer:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- music:(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- WP:INDAFD: "Saadey CM Saab" "Vipin Parashar" "Kashish Singh" "Harbhajan Mann" "Sumeet Singh Manchanda" "Avishek Majumder" "Gurpreet Ghuggi"
- Keep per meeting WP:NFF (paragraph 3). As topic notability is through the availability of sources (even if not currently used), no article ever has to make a claim "I am notable". The stub article already has sources which tell us filming has commenced with lead actor Harbhajan Mann, and a little BEFORE tells us its production HAS coverage to meet WP:GNG and that its release date is next month on October 30. It serves the project and its readers for this stub to be expanded over time and through regular editing using the available sources. Yes the current stub is a poorly sourced, but so what? When a film topic meets WP:NFF (paragraph 3), we do not delete it... we fix it. Sorry Jimfbleak but we look first, determine if the topic is notable and not judge it for being WP:IMPERFECT, and then we allow it to remain and be improved over time and through use of the many available sources. One editors opinion. Schmidt, Michael Q. 21:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Schmidt, , to me, that amounts to saying that all films (and by implication books and recordings) can have an article, even if not released at the time of posting, as long as they have some sort of reference to someone or something that already has an article. That interpretation of para 3 seems to rely on notability by association, which isn't normally acceptable. Not my understanding of the notability guidelines at all. Presumably your interpretation also applies to people (X's father was famous, so X gets an article as long as he can find a ref or two?) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- @ Jimfbleak: Please do not misstate or misinterpret or WP:WAX my arguments. Simply put, I pay attention to community consensus that created MOS:FILM#production and WP:NFF and WP:GNG, and understand that (no matter where it is being shot) IF a film project has entered filming (many never do) and ITS production receives coverage to meet WP:GNG (many never do) it may merit an article before release. I believe this filming project meets inclusion guides enough to be expanded per available sources to serve our readers. You (apparently) do not, and that's okay. Thank you. Schmidt, Michael Q. 07:32, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Schmidt, Michael Q. 09:16, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Agree with argumentation as presented by MichaelQSchmidt, above. Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 16:38, 18 September 2015 (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.