Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayan II

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 delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:24, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ayan II

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Prod contested by an IP without an explanation. Fails WP:NFF - no reliable sources showing that principal photography is underway, and (although merger into Ayan (film) has been suggested, there is nothing to merge there without sources in the first place. Bencherlite ^Talk 15:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I could find no reliable sources showing that principal photography is underway, either. --Stfg (talk) 16:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ayan (of which this would be a sequel) until there is actual confirmation (not WP:CRYSTAL rumors on blogspot), etc. per WP:NFF. Even once "confirmed" (apparently lots of Indian-genre films get claimed to have this status long before there is anything up to WP:NFF to have an actual article), could put a single sentence to that effect in the original film's article. DMacks (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I suggested the merge - as in, there seems to be no reason to have an article for the sequel yet and a single line in the first film's article could indicate one was planned. I'm still not certain of the notability of films in pre production..-- 🍺 Antiqueight ^confer 17:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect per earlier comments by others. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The inconsistency in the movie name between the article title and the lede indicates how premature this article is. As some news comes in, we can mention it in a sequel section of Ayan (film). Only after WP:NFF is met should we start an article for it. But until there's substantial coverage in reliable sources, no stand-alone article is warranted. —C.Fred (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I requested CSD initially Fiddle Faddle 18:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Incubate: per nominator's point about NFF, but this could be a case for incubation rather than deletion. Mat ty.007 18:26, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Evidently TOO SOON. - Zananiri (talk) 18:35, 27 October 2013 (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.