Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lava Kusa – The Warrior Twins


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Lava Kusa – The Warrior Twins

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article seems to fail WP:CRYSTAL and looks like blantant advertising.  Pick both man lol  01:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm going to offer a keep and rewrite vote considering that on one hand the subject of this article has several hits at Bing and therefore seems notable, but on the other hand I must agree that this is written a lot like an advertisement. It does indeed seem worthy of inclusion, but I recommend a complete rewrite. PCHS-NJROTC  (Messages) 04:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  04:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  04:57, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. J04n(talk page) 12:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete future film doesn't meet WP:NFF per guidelines. ApprenticeFan  talk  contribs 12:55, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as film has completed post production and is slated for a December 2009 upcoming release. It has been receiving coverage for nearly 3 years to meet WP:GNG and WP:NFF. Definitely the article will benefit from major cleanup to remove the sense of advert and to add proper sourcing, but guideline recommends that surmountable problems be addressed through regular editing and not through deletion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note I have begun the rewrite and sourcing. Any assistance will be most welcome.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Schmidt. Crafty (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I click on the link to Google News search up top, and all three results seems to establish its notability through legitimate coverage. Searching in another language, would probably result in even more results.   D r e a m Focus  21:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The three sources from Gnews definitely help in passing WP:NFF. Also, this appears to be L. Vaidyanathan's last work (and posthumous), so while notability isn't inherited, it definitely contributes. Also, MQS' work on the article has addressed the advert concerns. - Spaceman  Spiff  23:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and kudos to MichaelQSchmidt for the work he has done to the page, now well referenced and cleaned up. J04n(talk page) 02:08, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And thank you too J04n, for tagging it for a well deserved rescue.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep based on the improvements and sourcing by User:MichaelQSchmidt. It meets the WP:NFF standard now. Good work, Michael! Abecedare (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I do what I can.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Schmidt does it again. Joe Chill (talk) 13:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: RS available. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Well written, well sourced article. TomCat4680 (talk) 17:09, 27 November 2009 (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.