Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Urimai Kural

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. JForget 22:54, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Urimai Kural

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

Severe crystal balling -- It is way too early to create an article on this film and all information on the article are POV and taken from fansites. Eelam StyleZ (talk) 16:51, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the use has been known for spamming and crystal balling. Moreover, the article itself is completely filled with pathetic and unreliable sources. Universal Hero (talk) 21:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 04:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 04:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NFF as there are not enough reliable sources discussing this future film. This article is one of the worst examples of reference-padding I have seen on wikipedia, as decent sources are mixed in with blogs and forums; unconnected details are added with attached references; and all this is mixed in with ample WP:OR and often incomprehensible prose. See for example how this paper on the recession in USA is inserted without any rational connection with the film!. Abecedare (talk) 08:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and return article to author with our thanks, as many new articles arrive with no attempt at sourcing... and at least he made the effort. When the film is made he can return a trimmer version of his article. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 08:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NFF. The page has been deleted twice already, once under the current title and once under something else. Also, this title should belong to the 1970s film which was very notable but doesn't have an article yet.-SpacemanSpiff^{Calvin‡Hobbes} 14:20, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and give the author a Creative Use of References Barnstar for the wall-o-references (but wait until 2010). Priyanath ^talk 03:38, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy or something. It ought to be deleted per WP:CRYSTAL, of course, but including all those references (which apparently actually check out!) must count as a minor achievement (as unreliable and pointless as they are) — this article deserves to be saved somewhere as a parody of Wikipedia :P Shreevatsa (talk) 19:53, 18 August 2009 (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.