Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirumi


 * 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. Leniency is usually given to Indian films, shows, BLPs etc etc as sources are alot harder to find compared to say the UK or US (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 00:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Kirumi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreleased film that fails WP:GNG with no detailed secondary sources, just some promo images, an entry in a website database and a YouTube trailer. McGeddon (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. --  1Wiki8 Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR  (talk) 10:04, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. --  1Wiki8 Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR  (talk) 10:04, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Alts:
 * WP:INDAFD: Kirumi
 * director:
 * director:
 * producer:
 * producer:
 * studio:


 * Strong Keep per filming being completed and available sourcing shows the production as meeting WP:GNG and thus WP:NFF. Sheesh... the stubby thing needs work and use of available sources yes, but it being incomplete and improvable is not a deletion rationale., what WP:BEFORE did you attempt?  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I had a look around Google News but couldn't find anything that seemed reliable - I think I read that first one you linked, but dismissed it as a WP:NEWSPRIMARY interview with no byline which said its director was "a newcomer to the Tamil film industry". That second link seems to have some buzz around actors who are appearing, but are there any solid reliable sources about the film yet? This article has no byline and again has little to say about the film beyond quoting the director.
 * My deletion rationale is that it just doesn't meet WP:GNG. I did prod it as such, but an IP reverted it adding only a YouTube trailer. --McGeddon (talk) 11:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Google news is woefully inadequate for Indian Media, in that it does not index it properly... their flaw, not ours. WP:NEWSPRIMARY does not state a director cannot speak about or be asked about his project, and a great deal of reliable Indian media is done by staffers and released without byline. And even if an accepted reliable source give us the required more-than-trivial information, you may still take it to WP:RSN and get the opinion of others. And since the article is not about the director, his being a newcomer is not the issue. Production coverage is. But yes, the original author shows inexperience. Thanks.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 12:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure, I appreciate the problem of searching Indian media and will bear it in mind for future nominations. So have we got two non-WP:NEWSPRIMARY sources that cover the subject in any depth, or any NFILM shortcuts, yet? --McGeddon (talk) 13:11, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * NFILM shortcuts? Okay, yes... it meets WP:NFF (paragraph 3), And with the addition of brief but more-than-trivial information to share with our readers, the article is already looking better. Hint: WP:SIGCOV (guideline) does not mandate WP:SUBSTANTIAL (not a guideline). More to do.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 13:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets WP:GNG. Fairly good sourced coverage now. AusLondonder (talk) 08:57, 11 September 2015 (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.