Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/After the Third Bell


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 00:48, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

After the Third Bell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFILM: I can't see If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject expect this and this which looks like a interview session with the director and a copy of each other. GSS (talk |c|em ) 11:11, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 11:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 11:12, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment: It looks like the Asian Age source was a review. It looks like with that and the other sources, it could just squeak by NFILM. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  00:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe in your judgment but I'm a bit uncomfortable using Deccan Herald sources because of the author's linkedin profile. Both sources were published by the same author couple of months before the release of the film which trigging toward the promotional use and I can't see any source published post release except Asian Age you mentioned above. GSS (talk |c|em ) 08:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:12, 4 March 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  05:17, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Final relist.
 * Delete -- the only encyclopedically relevant prose in the article is "The Asian Age reviewed the movie, praising its two leads while also stating that it needed a better supporting cast." The rest is catalog-like listing of cast, release, etc. No value to the project at this time. This info can be found in the IMDB and an encyclopedia article is not necessary. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 00:47, 19 March 2017 (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.