Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raguluthunna Bharatham (3rd nomination)

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. Sandstein 07:04, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Raguluthunna Bharatham

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

As per WP:BEFORE searches, this is a non-notable film that does not meet WP:NFP or WP:NFO. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NFO criteria 3 "the film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking" ie Nandi Award for Best Story Writer which is verifiable for example here. Also, per User:Winged_Blades_of_Godric in the 2nd nomination: it is a commercial movie with famous actors, and you can see it is not forgotten because it is mentioned in this 2016 article about the director and in this 2018 article about the lyricist. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 13:23, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So said The Great Wiki Lord. (talk) 12:26, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Satisfies WP:NFILM, WP:NFP, WP:GNG.--PATH SLOPU 09:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. The Keep suggestions seem to be based on an arbitrary interpretation of the pertinent guideline, i.e. that "NFILM has technically boiled down to allotting an article for every film that has got 2 or more reviews across reliable sources". However, there is no basis for such an interpretation. (Even if the guideline were not followed, we should either change accordingly its wording, or point out the deviiations from it.) Wikipedia is not the international movie database and it is not a listing of indiscriminately collected information either. The article's subject fails WP:NFILM. -The Gnome (talk) 10:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 17:54, 7 April 2019 (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.