Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nagarpuram


 * 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 no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 17:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Nagarpuram

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that it meets WP:NFILM or WP:GNG Boleyn (talk) 07:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not even clear whether this film has even been released yet.  The articles on the two main actors state that the film is still in production (in which case WP:TOOSOON is relevant).  The only thing I found on the Web was this, which mentions the film only in passing (and which says that the film is the director's first).  NewYorkActuary (talk) 01:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as there's comprehensibly nothing minimally better for films notability and WP:GNG. SwisterTwister   talk  05:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Looking beyond the article:
 * type:
 * director:
 * star:
 * star:
 * music:
 * WP:INDAFD: Nagarpuram N.P. Sarathy Sridivya Akhil Arul Dev


 * Keep per being a released film project with coverage to meet WP:NF. A report for, , & ... Audio launch was in early 2013, and the film (trailer) was apparently released later that year, rather than the asserted 2015. When says he could not find anything, that pretty much assures me that there's plenty to find for those who actually look.  His not having working google-foo is no reason to believe sources do not exist. {chuckle). Better to fix this one up to serve the project than to delete it because it began as an unsourced offering.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 11:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Michael Perhaps I could have been more comprehensive in my posting.  I did come across some sites that indicated that trailers for the film had been released in 2013, but nothing that said the film itself had been released.  However, there is no longer any need to speculate on the film's status.  I note that, since your posting here, you've added an external link to the article that confirms that the film remains unreleased, with a projected release date of August 2016.  So, we are definitely in "too soon" territory.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 15:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's me being "more comprehensive" as well: As author of the essay TOO SOON, I will clarify that it defaults to and does not over-rule nor supplant guideline WP:NFF...the guide which instructs us that when filming is confirmed (as it is) and a film is not yet confirmed as released, if the elements of its production have the coverage to meet WP:GNG (as does this one), then an article is merited. In my own searches, I found and offered coverage of casting, of production, of audio launch, and of trailer release... coverage directly and in detail of the project's particulars... not just trivial mentions. An article is merited. Simple... and thank you.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 00:51, 28 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Withdraw nomination (although this can't be just done because there are delete votes) has proved me wrong with his findings. Boleyn (talk) 07:21, 28 May 2016 (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.