Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naaka Bandi

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naaka Bandi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non notable film, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE search to make it pass WP:NFILM. Only things found were movie database sites and youtube videos. Tagged for notability for 9 years. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 22:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia needs to stop being an IMDb mirror.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Pasting a comment that I posted on a similar AfD earlier this afternoon. This page follows many other pages that I have been observing in the last few weeks (and perhaps before that as well), of Indian films from the 1950-1980s, that have been showing up for deletion. By the current rules of WP:NFILM, they all fall short of the requirements, primarily because of the lack of English language online sources of reviews for these films, resulting in an undue number of films from the 1990s. This should be a topic of discussion for one of the India Projects, to think through at an aggregate rather than discussing each of the films on a one on one basis in an AfD. I agree with the high level sentiment that Wikipedia is not IMDB. However, in the same vein, Wikipedia is not just a replication avenue other recent online sources (read as recent newspapers).Ktin (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The central principal of Wikipedia is verrifiability. Articles must be based on reliable sourcing. You are free to look for reliable sourcing in any way you choose. There are lots of articles based on reliable sourcing outside the body of recent newspapers. Each article is considered on its own merits. Wikipedia cannot live up to reliability and keep articles that lack any reliable sourcing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Johnpacklambert, I definitely see your point. I have nothing against anything that you have stated above. Let's take verifiability and reliable sourcing -- we use IMDB a reliable source for sourcing filmography for actors. So, that source is considered reliable to prove verifiability. When a titled film uses IMDB a reliable source that is agreed for filmography, I am sure its verifiability is not impacted. The point that I have here is about not being able to prove notability. (made a strike through and update in my text post the comment below. I dont want to make this an orthogonal debate rather than this AfD. Hence, this is better taken outside to a forum like the ICTF. Cheers)Ktin (talk) 15:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • IMDb is ruled non-verifiable. We should stop using it for anything, period.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - in the absence of any proof of notability, deletion is the only valid option Spiderone 09:01, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: There is no evidence this film is notable, for being good or bad. The article itself states, "The movie was not a commercial success and was acknowledged to have done nothing to the career of the leading stars." In the absence of any sources stating otherwise, its clear this movie is not worthy of note.   // Timothy :: talk  05:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Shibu_Mitra#Filmography per WP:CHEAP. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 01:02, 20 September 2020 (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.