Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warning (2015 film)


 * 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 defaulting to Keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:59, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Warning (2015 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Created by a sockpuppet of a blocked user in violation of their block, this is ineligible for speedy deletion under WP:G5 because they contributed only 39% of the content. Substantial edits were made by a sockpuppet (Sadmansakib625, 5%) of a different sockmaster, an WP:SPA (Golamrabbani112, 15%), and various IP editors (37%). We should assume that their contributions were in good faith.

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. It is not a clone of IMDb, which aims to list the credits and basic details - the information that can be gleaned by watching it or reading its DVD packaging - of every film ever made. Wikipedia treats creative works in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the development, design, reception, significance, and influence of works in addition to concise summaries of those works.

The article cites only a Wordpress blog and the Facebook page of Sadman Sakib Sifat (compare with the sockpuppet above), not reliable sources for what little content they support. Searches of the usual Google types, in English and Bengali, for coverage after the film was released, found: Bengali Wikipedia, BMDB (a Bengali IMDb-wannabe that has a history of copying from Wikipedia without attribution), and a single review, less than 150 words, on an obscure website by an even less known reviewer. WP:NFILM accepts two or more full-length (not capsule) reviews by nationally known critics as other evidence of notability. This film doesn't meet that, or any of the other criteria of the subject-specific guideline.

Nor does it meet WP:GNG. From before the film was released there is one English-language source, and numerous similar Bengali-language ones. They are press release-based promotional hype drummed up by the studio, director, and actors performing their pre-release publicity duties. There is no independent journalistic coverage or critical analysis. Worldbruce (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 16:42, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Week Keep, The film was widely distributed as it was released in 83 cinema halls. In recent years Mental released in the highest cinema hall (150+  cinema  halls).S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 05:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:NFILM says if a film "is widely distributed and has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics" (emphasis mine), that generally indicates that the required sources are likely to exist. I couldn't find any such reviews. In any case, can you find significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, or just involved person X saying it was great to work with actor Y, and they hope people go to see the film? One reads stories of theatre owners in Bangladesh cancelling scheduled showings of other widely distributed films because only two people show up to buy tickets. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:19, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 17:52, 1 February 2020 (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.