Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mughal E Azam (Musical)

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 redirect to Mughal-e-Azam. MBisanz ^talk 22:53, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mughal E Azam (Musical)

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

Delete. Fails GNG. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 11:32, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~Merge: Meets GNG. Sources: Times of India, India West, Indian Express, United News of India, News Kerala, Economic Times, Hindustan Times, Huff Post India, Can India News, Big News Network. These are all what I was able to find. I doubt if nominator performed WP:BEFORE in present case. Anup [Talk] 18:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mughal-e-Azam. This is basically a theatre adaptation of the film (which itself is an adaptation of the play but we don't have an article on the play). Sources exist, but this can easily be covered in the article on the film. --Michig (talk) 07:49, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, merge appears to be a better option. Just noticed, this article is created under another title, Mughal E Azam Play (turned it into a redirect). Looks like it is a part of some kind of promotional campaign by organizers of the play which is scheduled to premiere on 21 Oct. Anup [Talk] 20:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as there's nothing to merge, as the sources are only listed at this AfD and not in the article. Anything anything useful could be picked up from the article history. As part of a WP:PROMO campaign, it's best redirected (vs a merge) since we don't know who / when will actually merge this article. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no recommendation to make on this article, but it is quite irrelevant to AFD whether or not the sources are actually in the article. They still confer notability (or not) to the same degree. SpinningSpark 23:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per K.e.coffman for now. NCPA and Sharpoorji Pallonji involvement are promising, but to me, the article doesn't justify its notability as is. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:50, 17 October 2016 (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.