Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucky Di Unlucky Story

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 Incubation. J04n(talk page) 11:36, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky Di Unlucky Story

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

Non-notable upcoming film, previously proded (twice) BOVINEBOY2008 00:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unsourced crystal ball exercise. No prejudice against a restart of the piece after film is released if independent published sources have appeared by then. Carrite (talk) 02:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Several other websites have mentioned about the movie and I have added the references. Internet Phenomena in this area where movie is releasing is not widespread, so sometime news about a movie doesn't appear on the internet quickly.Vigyani (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate for while as being slightly TOO SOON and not (yet) having enough enduring coverage to (yet) be an exception to WP:NFF. Not (yet) included in the sources added by User:Vigyani, I found reliable sources Hindustani Times and Indian Express speaking about the project. Just as Cinema Punjabi saying "More Details to follow...", we need a few more such to flesh out a suitable article. It's close though. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Incubate/Redirect to Smeep Kang. I did a search and found the two sources Schmidt mentions, but I can't find anything that would confirm that filming has commenced or any actual mention in RS at all. I did find some brief mentions, but nothing that would really show notability. I think that the best course for now would be to incubate the film article and redirect this to the director's page. The director's page needs a little work, but I think there's just enough out there to rationalize notability for him. This just doesn't pass WP:NFF at this point in time and none of the places that do mention this film beyond the minimal RS I've found really count towards notability at all.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 01:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A simple search in Google demonstrates that the film is indeed notable. Moreover, there are several sources that would make a great addition to this article. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 04:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There is the issue of the film not yet being released. Please take a read of WP:NYF. It takes a lot of enduring and persistent coverage for an unrelesased project to be considered a reasonable exception to WP:NFF. Can you bring forward sourcing that has shown the filming has commenced? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:30, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 00:31, 24 February 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.