Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Film

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting
(Redirected from Wikipedia:DSFILM)
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Film. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Film|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Film. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Purge page cache watch
Scan for Film AfDs

Scan for Film Prods
Scan for Film template TfDs

Related deletion sorting


Film

edit

Rabindranath Tagore filmography

edit
Rabindranath Tagore filmography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page was created by a now-blocked sock puppet. The content within the page appears to be entirely made up; a lot of the entries listed are actually the works of Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay (could be a case of WP:HOAX). Not to mention that we already have the article Adaptations of works of Rabindranath Tagore in film and television, which would only make this page a redundant duplicate. Keivan.fTalk 05:19, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajob Premer Golpo

edit
Ajob Premer Golpo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sources are unreliable. I cannot find anything better to replace in a WP:BEFORE. There are only two pages of hits on GNews and nothing that is reliable from what I see. CNMall41 (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nunakkuzhi

edit
Nunakkuzhi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:FILM and WP:GNG. Declined three times at AfC before creator moved to mainspace. Then disputed draftification. Sources are unreliable and fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. The TOI sources used here are not reliable for notability based on recent RSN discussion. CNMall41 (talk) 08:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not based on release date. Are there sources that show notability that are considered reliable?--CNMall41 (talk) 08:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just wait for 10 days. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you point me to the section of notability guidelines where it says to wait 10 days? Very confused as to your rationale. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article creator could have chosen to leave it incubated until sources came out. Chose not to which is why we are here. In the meantime, release date does not mean notability. There are films that have been released that do not qualify and have been deleted. So again, I am not sure how waiting leads to notability. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Waiting does not lead to notability. But opening an AfD about a film with notable cast and director 10 days before announced release is a waste of time and implies unnecessary bureaucracy and discussions, in my opinion. In 9-10 days, reviews will be published. And 10 days=less than 1 relist. So, yes, please wait. And as I've explained I consider this is a waste of time, I will leave it at that. Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to have an issue with me following the process. That is something for ANI. As stated, time does not mean notability. There are films that have been released that have "waited" 10 days (and more) and not been notable. You are assuming this will be notable. Maybe it will be which is why it should have been left in draftspace. But again, here we are. --CNMall41 (talk) 08:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear sir/Ma'am,
Thank you for your feedback regarding the Wikipedia article on [Nunakuzhi]. I appreciate your diligence in reviewing the content.
I understand your concern about the timing of the film’s release and the relevance of the article. However, I would like to clarify that the film is indeed genuine and is scheduled for release as planned. The article has been created based on verified information and reliable sources that confirm the film's legitimacy and its forthcoming release.
In accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines, articles about notable films are often written well in advance of their release, provided there is sufficient verifiable information available. The inclusion of such articles serves to inform the public and preserve historical and cultural records.
If you have specific concerns or require additional sources to verify the film’s status, please let me know. I am happy to provide any further information or make any necessary adjustments to ensure the article meets Wikipedia’s standards.
Thank you for your understanding and for contributing to the quality of Wikipedia. Aditya.nagda (talk) 11:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify again, the editor move the page to mainspace without addressing the concern on why the page was declined. This is the user's first article. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 09:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article was in draft. It was declined, then rejected, then creator moved to mainspace. I draftified it after that and user immediately returned it to mainspace without addressing the concern. --CNMall41 (talk) 09:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I guess your right Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the editor move the page to the mainspace without addressing the reason why the draft got rejected. Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 10:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i would request you to please give go ahead for this film article into mainspace without any interruption and will keep updating the article with fresh press release and new song updates. Aditya.nagda (talk) 12:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Page was rejected three times with reason "Submission is about a film not yet shown to meet notability guidelines". The creator of the page failed to address the rejection and moved the page from draft to mainspace twice. The creator should have left the page in draft space to make further improvements but will likely move it back without addressing the rejection as done before and that is my vote is to delete. RangersRus (talk) 14:31, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas Carole

edit
Christmas Carole (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unreleased (although premiered at a minor film festival) French film. Per WP:SNG WP:NFF, unreleased films are not notable unless their production is notable, which is not the case here John B123 (talk) 20:18, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drafity per WP:TOOSOON and wait for the release to determine the notability Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 00:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Ridiculous nomination for deletion. The film has been publicly released and the article is very well sourced with a variety of reliable sources, satisfying WP:TOOSOON AND WP:NFF handily. Numerous news articles from a variety of outlets have discussed the film's production and release, several of which are used as sources in the article. Happy Evil Dude (talk) 01:14, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • DRAFTIFY, not released, despite the preceding comment. Should be in draft until its actual release and reviews can be obtained. DonaldD23 talk to me 02:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: released, although not yet distributed in film theaters, very notable cast, has received coverage about production and will be reviewed when distributed for Christmas. All content is verifiable. But this is obviously notable, there is indeed no question of it. More available online. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:27, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inter-Services Public Relations media productions

edit
Inter-Services Public Relations media productions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NLIST. Mention insignificant work. WP:NOT DIRECTORY — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:44, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paradha

edit
Paradha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFF. No evidence that the film has begun principal photography. Melmann 14:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gabby's Dollhouse: The Movie

edit
Gabby's Dollhouse: The Movie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking significant coverage per WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 20:16, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It is generally unwise to assume that a film that is still in production will be notable when/if it is publicly released. In particular, the WP:NFF guidelines state: "In the case of animated films, reliable sources must confirm that the film is clearly out of the pre-production process, meaning that the final animation frames are actively being drawn or rendered, and final recordings of voice-overs and music have commenced." This does not seem to be the case. It also states: "Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines..." I think it is clear that these criteria have not been met in this case. Of course the editors can retain a draft or the article could be draftified, but it is not suitable for main space. Lamona (talk) 23:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21st Asianet Film Awards

edit
21st Asianet Film Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One of many WP:CFORKS for Asianet Film Awards created by now blocked/banned user. Sources I find in a WP:BEFORE are not significant enough to show notability for this segment of the award. The information is also covered in the main pace for Asianet Film Awards so this needs deleted or the information about individual winners on that main page needs removed. CNMall41 (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a list, it is an event. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If only you had opened the link to the guideline you might have had a chance to understand what it says. And, on top of this, your comment is completely absurd. The page uses table format and is about an event. It's not the event itself. But maybe you consider, for example, that BLP pages about actors are the actors themselves and not articles. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. This is about an event with a list of winners. It is not a list article. I am curious how you know if I opened any link or not or why you want to be uncivil. --CNMall41 (talk) 10:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you indeed open(ed) the link you probably (would have) realise(d) that WP:SPLITLIST does not deal only with "list articles"/"lists" and basically says the same thing as what you yourself say at the end of your rationale, from what I understand of it. You indeed explain that "information is also covered in the main (s)pace for Asianet Film Awards so this needs deleted" (if such is the case, it would seem better to redirect rather than delete, but, anyway), but according to WP:SPLITLIST, it would be even better if one could do as you suggest at the end of the same sentence and edit the page(s), as "the information about individual winners on that main page needs removed."
I don't "want to be uncivil" but, as your latest reply perfectly shows, by the way, your initial reply 1) wasn't actually commenting on anything I had referred to (so I assumed you didn't open the link, and one might even assume you still haven't) 2) offered a completely false and absurd dichotomy, on which I commented with a humorous similar dichotomy, obviously not seriously implying that you do really believe that actors are pages. I apologise if you thought I was saying this seriously and if indeed you have opened the page but did not see it was not dealing with lists only. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:11, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. Just a note that your humor does not come across as humor. It comes across as advertorial which takes away from my enjoyment of editing Wikipedia. But again, I understand now based on your explanation. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F*** Marry Kill

edit
F*** Marry Kill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacking significant coverage per WP:NFP BOVINEBOY2008 08:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NFF. It has not yet been released, and does not appear notable enough to have an article before release. Jerdle (talk) 21:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify I agree with Loriebdrew, we should move this page to draft as it is currently not notable enough for mainspace Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 13:06, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability not established. Spideog (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who's That Girl (upcoming film)

edit
Who's That Girl (upcoming film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per WP:TOOSOON, this film should not have an article yet. This article has been draftified by KingArti twice despite the guidelines at WP:DRAFTIFY, and the draftification has been reverted. GTrang (talk) 04:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify - It looks like there is consensus that the article should not remain in main space. I think that the previous attempts to send it to draft were made in good faith knowing that filming has not happened, they just didn't follow the guidelines, perhaps unaware of them. That said, I think going to draft space is the best WP:ATD option, mostly because there has now been a slight bit of news that the production might get back on track with some casting. The work that has gone into this article thus far can be built upon in draft space. I think an outright delete would not be the best option because its likely to be further developed in draft space. I do not think a redirect is the best option for the history of this article because the work would likely get buried behind the redirect, and a new draft would be started over, losing the work thus far. Not a problem per WP:PARALLEL per se; just a bit dissapointing to the previous authors. However, I would recommend that a redirect be left behind targeting Cultural_impact_of_Madonna#Cultural_depictions that could be tagged {{R with possibilities}} so that people can find info and at the same time, have a path to develop the draft. (Or target Madonna filmography instead since the mention is already there and wouldn't need to be added.) -2pou (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify The article stating that the project has re-started has the air of a rumor rather than a fact. It is pretty clear that this isn't well into production or post-production. The article should wait until there is something more concrete to show. Yes, there are lots of sources but most of them are just the Madonna-adjacent hype. Lamona (talk) 23:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions

edit

Categories

edit

Templates

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Film&oldid=1238724270"