Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cinema of Pakistan


 * 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, nominator has stated withdrawal per this diff on my talk page, and has asked me to close the nomination. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 05:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Cinema of Pakistan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There are so many things wrong with this article that I scarcely know where to begin.
 * 1) Sections like Cineplex and Zibakhana are written like advertisements.
 * 2) Article is full of superlative POV's, eg, Saqib Malik is one of the most critically acclaimed directors in the Pakistani satellite entertainment circles, and his film, which brings together some of Pakistan's best talents, is being much awaited.
 * 3) Article is full of original research, contrary to WP:OR
 * 4) There are no references at all.
 * 5) Weasel words throughout the article.
 * 6) It is full of irrelvant asides and littered with red links.
 * 7) Very poor English in the article, eg, a popular actress jerked the film industry and broke countless hearts.
 * 8) Bad grammar.
 * 9) Poor quality.

Tovojolo (talk) 18:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Article demands clean-up, but clean-up issues are not deletion issues. I see no reason for Wikipedia not to have an article entitled this (or something like it.  Maybe "Cinema in Pakistan" or "Film in Pakistan" would be more standard).  However, despite the fact that the article has all of the problems listed above, not ONE of them is a justification for deletion.  Fix the article up so it meets standards, don't delete it... --Jayron32| talk | contribs  18:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. AfD is not cleanup. Maintenance tags have been applied to the article, so now it just needs some fixing up. I'll see what I can do. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 19:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Perfectly legitimate subject which just needs improving as an article. There are so many things wrong with the nomination that I scarcely know where to begin. Nick mallory (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2007 (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.