Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bin bulaye baraati


 * 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 &minus; The article has undergone major change since it was tagged, and is unrecognisable. I withdraw my nomination. Thanks go to MichaelQSchmidt for making the wholesale changes. (non-admin closure) — Fly by Night  ( talk )  20:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Bin bulaye baraati

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete &minus; This is an unreferenced articled with no context. It appears that the article relates to a film that may have been released. The article makes no attempt to indicate notability. All the article consists of is the title, and a few members of the cast. Wikipedia is not a directory. — Fly by Night  ( talk )  06:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC) —  Fly by Night  ( talk )  06:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep &minus; Article is unrecognisable from the original, and shouldn't be deleted. —  Fly by Night  ( talk )  09:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets WP:NF. New, one-day-old article, that research shows is covered by critical commentary in multiple available sources independent of the topic. Yes, the new article needs work, but what can be fixed through regular editing is rarely a candidate for deletion. It was tagged for improvemnets 45 minutes after the author's last edit. That was for the good, alerting the author and others of concerns. But not good for that it was then sent to AFD just six hours and 25 minutes later. Wikipedia is a work in progress, and AFD is not cleanup.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * And in consideration of how easy it was to take the nominated version and expand and improve it using available sources, I have asked the nominator to consider a withdrawal for the good of the project.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:57, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't find your tone at all constructive. As you say, the article has undergone massive changes, and is unrecognisable from its original state. It's the duty of the person that created the article to make sure it meets our quality standards. May I ask that you improve your attitude for the good of the project? — Fly by Night  ( talk )  09:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the withdrawal.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:44, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome, and thank you for making the substantial and skilful changes that you made and for bringing those to my attention. — Fly by Night  ( talk )  20:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC)