Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haweli Ek Paheli


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Haweli Ek Paheli

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Unsourced and unsourcable hoax article. Fails verifiability, and thus fails WP:NF.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax.  Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  10:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete but preserve somewhere lest it come back. Most peculiar. Egg   Centri  c  18:50, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing admin Please consider MfD for User:Haweli Ek Paheli when closing. Wouldn't apply until then.  Everyone else, consider combing through this, the contribs from the article creator. Sniff, sniff...   Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  23:16, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, having that particular username to promote a film is itself a violation of WP:PRODNAME.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:52, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * And too, the userpage for User:Gaganpreet S Sokhi is set up to look like a BLP.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:50, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax. In addition, I've filed an SPI regarding the article's creator. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 10:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: The entire box of puppets found has been quickly confirmed by checkuser and have been dealt with accordingly  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 15:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Woooo! Such a made-up article. Delete it! And don't make any film on this plot. There are better chances that the money kept untouched in a piggy bank would earn more profits. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Really amazing work done in creating the article. But I still wonder that how did it get away from Special:NewPages?  →TSU tp* 10:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete : Sigh, all I want to know is how a film with so many awards escaped my notice, especially in 2009, when I scanned newspapers back and front for movie releases. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete clear hoax and per AnimeshKulkarni :) --Ð ℬig XЯaɣ  20:40, 29 May 2012 (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.