Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raftaar (1975 film)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Mz7 (talk) 00:40, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Raftaar (1975 film)[edit]

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

No references added since creation. Musa Talk 11:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 11:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk 11:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have just added a {{cite book}} which nom could have added per the mandatory WP:BEFORE. The reason given in the nomination, "No references added since creation", would appear to reflect the common misunderstanding that an external link, e.g. here IMDb, is not a reference, which it is, and is hardly a policy based reason for a debate at AFD. Further a 1975 Indian film is obviously an easy target for exclusionists and may be hard to source, so pinging page creator and the Master of Film Article Resque (Dr. Blofeld—MichaelQSchmidt) for some help here. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 12:49, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:INDAFD search: Raftaar Dinesh-Ramanesh -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 13:07, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sam Sailor: Then what's the significance of this article? It's Wikipedia not a movie database. There is nothing in the article except general information which is taken from IMDb. That's why I think it should be deleted.--Musa Talk 18:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs expansion especially regarding the plot, rather than deletion.In my opinion every film or TV series should have a wiki page as significance issues are too subjective and most films aren't really significant.46.208.73.116 (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, expanded article with refs. Kaayay (talk) 05:32, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Thanks to the great expansion by Kaayay♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:18, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article now meets WP:NFILM all thanks to the admirable work by Kaayay. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:43, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
brilliant expansion by Kaayay, must be a keep185.12.190.145 (talk) 14:14, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as without doubt this 40-year-old (waaaay pre-internet) Indian film has been shown to meet WP:NF. Kudos to Kaayay for his diligence and contributions underscoring just what it means to BUILD an encyclopedia... not tear one down. Y And to the nominator, please go read WP:IMPATIENT to see that in a self-acknowledged imperfect Wikipedia which is certainly far from complete there is no real deadline that everything be perfect now, this week, this month, or even 10 years from now. And while we are grateful that it was improved, AFD is not the place to force work by others. If anyone wishes to speedy keep and close this, it would not be taken to DRV. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:04, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Meets NFILM, we really have to keep an eye on this WP:RECENTISM tendency to put an unneeded stinkeye on anything pre-google. Montanabw ^(talk) 02:51, 22 November 2015 (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.