Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Golmaal 4

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, defaulted as keep.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Golmaal 4

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

The movie mentioning Golmaal 4 has only one ref and reading through that I can not see any of the details which are mentioned on the wiki page. Total misleading information. Director is busy promoting his new film chennai express and no principal photography has been started neither the cast for the film crew producers distributors are finalized. In my opinion this article should not be on wiki as of now, but may be in the future when the initial steps are been confirmed. Daan0001 (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Have you seen this, Daan0001? The production has been discussed in the major Indian newspapers. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 11:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment These ref fom google search are based from 2011 to 2012 due to the popularity of Golmaal 3, as Golmaal is a franchise. Theres no news from the movies cast to production so far and page should only included in wiki once the movie is on production as wikipedia as not a place for predictions what so ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daan0001 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- With respects, it is quite logical that articles dealing with an upcoming film project speak about predecessors. For instance, ALL early information on Spiderman 2 and Spiderman 3 were related to spoke of and were because of the popularity of forebears. Further, your declaration that "wikipedia is not a place for predictions what so ever" is incorrect and not per policy... a policy which specifically instructs that future events may be discussed if properly sourced. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:56, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep With Reliance Entertainment's release of an official trailer we have an indicator that some level filming has taken place, this makes sense as as the project itself was announced in March 2013 as filming later this year,[1] and this IS four months later. We already know that Golmaal: Fun Unlimited led to the more successful Golmaal Returns which led to Golmaal 3 and sources confirm a conformed interest in the filming of Golmaal 4. All 4 closely related topics could certainly be written of and sourced within a series article. Fine that NDTV told us in 2011 that Golmaal 4 was not to be expected until 2013,[2] but now we have independent sources in 2013 telling us it will film later this year.[3] But until Golmaal film series is written we do have enough coverage from 2011 through 2013 of the 4th in the series to allow an imperfect article to exist and be expanded and sourced over time and through regular editing. Available sources speak toward script, casting, and locations... all great stuff for an article's production section. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment To the comment keep above i would like to bring the attention the youtube clip provided saying Golmaal 4 is misleading the as the actual content is a telugu movie called Toofan, a remake on Zanjeer hindi movie starring ram charan and priyanka chopra in the lead roles. Im adding the link to original clip which Reliance Entertainment's Official YouTube channel posted on 4th July 2013 Toofan Official Trailer. Non of the sources mention a script casting locations and as the director busy finalising his current project and this a future segment. --Daan0001 (talk) 09:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Response: No intent to mislead, as I do not read nor understand Telugu and accepted the trailer's English title on good faith. Formerly on hold,[4][5] we still have enough in reliable sources... some quite recent... which discuss planning and pre-production and production and scripting and related topics... enough so that a decent start class article can begin being fleshed out.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] And when we have a projected release date of November 2013... (quite reasonable when considering just how speedily India cranks out film projects) policy allows this topic may be spoken of somewhere. In considering WP:NFF, we look to a film topic's persistant and enduring coverage, and then the likelihood (based upon the franchise's success) that the project will be produced. Another point is that we do ALLOW and HAVE in fact HAD articles on unmade films. In building an encyclopedia, we do not demand nor expect that every contribution be perfect right out the gate. It serves the project that this be improved over time and through regular editing. And lest it be forgotten, policy encourages we consider all alternatives to outright deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 12:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment The reference you have provided is not a reliable source at all what so ever for the release date as non of the main stream websites and nespapers in India have always an update for the films been resealed in India. Examples as; Bollywood Hungama no Mention Indicine no Mention

On this note i do not understand why and how these main websites in India would miss a such a huge franchise release date or about any information with regard.

All im saying is this a future project yet to be published and any information and content including cast to production which would be on Wikipedia is totally misleading to the readers until such information are confirmed and finalized. I assume even User;MichaelQSchmidt got misled watching that clip on YouTube which was not Golmaal 4 but Toofan and which basically says to me that even after reading the Golmaal 4 article on Wikipedia User could not even identify and compare the cast who appeared on the YouTube clip and the names on artcle. That shows the User does not have any idea about Indian Cinema/ actors / actresses.--Daan0001 (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous sources were brought forth AFTER and because of your pointed out my good faith error about a mis-titled non-English trailer, and I granted my inability to read or understand Indian languages (which means I am unable to search for sources in those non-English laguages). Neither qualifies you to assert that I do not understand film articles.... 'cause I do. I DO recognize your own misunderstanding of policy and guideline, and in my being an editor who does understand the importance of alternatives to deletion, and as someone with a proven willingness and ability to improve a few articles, I will ignore your WP:ADHOM, and not involve myself in unneccessary WP:BLUD. I will let others read this discussion, look themselves at the multiple available sources toward this topic and will accept whatever consensus is created herein toward whether or not it serves the project to have this topic written of in some manner, even if only in context to others in the series. Thank you, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 14:27, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article is poorly sourced. Movie might be from a franchise but nothing is confirmed. Page should be deleted untill confirmed star cast and procuders revealed. Theres no web site confirming cats principle photography neither any filming. The movie will be made at any point in the future i.e in 2014, but nothing confirmed. still question mark movie on hold Bolly123 (talk) 14:10, 3 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 20:58, 29 July 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.