Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheekha


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Courcelles (talk) 20:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Cheekha

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article about a film, not properly referenced as passing WP:NFILM. As always, every film is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because it exists -- films have to pass notability markers, such as notable film awards and/or the reception of enough reliable source coverage about the film to pass WP:GNG. But the referencing here consists of two directory entries that aren't support for notability at all, and glancing namechecks of the film's existence in coverage of its lead actor as a person, with no sources shown that are actually about the film -- and fundamentally, the notability claim is that the film exists, which isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt the sourcing from having to be better than it is. Bearcat (talk) 13:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Arbitrarily0   ( talk ) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Bearcat (talk) 13:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * rather Keep. There are probably sources in Hindi. The sources on the page are indeed only half-focusing on the film (some less than half, true) but still, reading them makes you think it's mildly notable.— MY, OH, MY ! 22:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * We don't keep badly sourced articles just because somebody speculates that better sources might exist — anybody can claim that better sources might exist for anything, even hoaxes. So we only keep poorly sourced articles if better sources are proven to exist, and idly speculating about the possibility of maybe finding better sources than have actually been shown doesn't count for much. Bearcat (talk) 01:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete appears to fail the general notability guideline. It would be reasonable to keep it if it passed the additional criteria in WP:NFILM on the presumption that the required sources are likely to exist in Hindi, but we don't have any evidence that it does. I'm not sure the film actually got a wide release given that the sources are largely talking about the premiere at a film festival, if it didn't then there aren't likely to be many reviews.  Hut 8.5  17:04, 31 May 2023 (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.