From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. + Nominator Withdrawn. ( non-admin closure) — ☮ JAaron95 Talk 15:05, 24 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Kabali

Kabali (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Pa. Ranjith

Fails WP:NFF - The principal photography is yet to commence. — Vensatry (ping) 14:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - Filming set to commence according to multiple sources. Its currently in preproduction. The article will be cleaned up. 15:40, 17 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.33.180.117 ( talk)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 23:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 23:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC) reply
type:(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
year:(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
director:(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
lead::(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
also:(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
also:(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:INDAFD: Kabali "Pa. Ranjith" Rajinikanth "Radhika Apte" "Prakash Raj"
  • Temporary redirect for now to director Pa. Ranjith#Filmography and give the article itself back to its author for a short while as a draft at User:Lakshmikandh/workspace/Pa. Ranjith or whomsoever wants it for a short time. Sorry anon IP 173.33.180.117, but the redirect will not be for long if this begins filming next month... but in its not filming, it is simply TOO SOON. I do grant however that eceptions do exist, and with the sheer amount of existing coverage (see above) this may well be one. Schmidt, Michael Q. 01:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply
    • Comment: redirecting the article to the original author would be disastrous as his edits seem very immature and apparently has a history of not responding to talk page posts. I agree it meets the WP:TOOSOON clause, but as nothing in this article is WP:CRYSTALBALLING, I say we give it a go for now. 173.33.180.117 ( talk) 23:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Response: Anon IP you are incorrect. Please re-read what I wrote, as I am NOT suggesting a redirect to an author, but to the sourcable as involved notable filmmaker. And please avoid WP:ADHOM arguments. Since anyone is allowed to contribute, perhaps suggesting a mentor-ship of a newcomer would be far better than your declaring them immature. And please... while I agree this one is TOO SOON, properly sourced WP:SPECULATION is not disallowed, and redirecting for a short while to the filmmaker is precisely per policy and guideline, just as is my suggesting the article could be placed in a draftspace until the topic meets inclusion criteria. Schmidt, Michael Q. 00:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Comment. The AFD tag on the article was redlinked due to a typo in the template. I've corrected that, but if this debate is down to the wire at closing time, the closing admin should consider adding a day or two to account for those first two days. FYI. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 20:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Update, According to this source, the film has begun its principal photography. 173.33.180.117 ( talk) 21:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC) reply
  • The editor who nominated the article for deletion in the first place justified it with the concern that the film hadn't started principal photography. Definitions aside, I believe the article should be kept. Its notable and is backed with reliable sources. 173.33.180.117 ( talk) 12:17, 22 August 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Keep as a topic which exceeds WP:GNG enough to merit being a reasonable exception to WP:NFF. Yes, I had up above suggested a redirect (now struck) based upon what was it looked like when nominated, but the then-stub article has gone through marked improvements to become a decent start or C-class and, as the likely-hood of filming beginning in a very few weeks has increased, I have been convinced that it remaining and being further improved over time and through regular editorial efforts serves the project and its readers. Schmidt, Michael Q. 02:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC) reply
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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kabali&oldid=1136674840"