Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poovarasam Peepee


 * 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The result was keep (nomination withdrawn). (non-admin closure) Anupmehra  - Let's talk!  05:48, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Poovarasam Peepee

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is an unreleased film, and therefore may not meet the notability guidelines for film. Prof. Mc (talk) 14:01, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no indication that the film is significant as per the notability guidelines for an unreleased film. If its importance is on the level of Star Wars VII or Jurassic World, the page should indicate such. Prof. Mc (talk) 14:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Nominator's second "delete" affirmation has been moved directly under his original deletion statement and then struck. With respects, only one delete per editor and his was made in his nomination.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: The film is due to be out by the end of this month, but if an article on it can't stay, then why should Jurassic World and Star Wars VII, both which are coming in 2015? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Unreleased yes, but future films may have an article per WP:NFF if principal photography has commenced. And this one is in fact releasing in about 20 days. Furthermore, the sources are all very reliable from notable sites, so according to me, the notability guidelines are met as well. Veera Dheera Sooran (talk) 14:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - From WP:NFF, it would only be notable if the "production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." I cannot see where the production is notable at this point. If there is a way to incubate the article in a user space until it is released and hopefully has additional references, this one could be brought back rather quickly. However, if we stick to the letter of the guideline, it would not meet WP:NFF in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:58, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 03:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per reliable source the movie will soon be released end of May. It wouldn't make sense to delete this article right infront of its release.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 05:11, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:INDAFD: Poovarasam Peepee


 * Strong Keep. We have a film that will release in a very few weeks and available sourcing shows the topic as meeting WP:NFF (paragraph 3).  In this instance, deletion does not serve to improve Wikipedia. I would ask that Prof. Mc consider withdrawing his objections to this article and that CNMall41 refer to applicable guidelines and also reconsider his own objections.  Cheers.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator. Happy to withdraw this. Prof. Mc (talk) 05:23, 11 May 2014 (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.