Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Breaking News (2012 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 redirect to Nagathihalli Chandrashekar. —SW— ^express 20:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking News (2012 film)[edit]

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

Not yet released movie. No evidence of notability. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Redirect for failing WP:NF and start of pre-production work. Secret of success (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We do have options other than outright deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect is appropriate only if at least a single reliable source exists. Otherwise, the article falls under the criteria for speedy deletion for being an obvious hoax and the creation of it is considered vandalism, per Wikipedia:CSD#G3. If there are sources, I'm fine with a redirect. Secret of success (talk) 05:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right, the sources have been given below, I'm opting to redirect it. Secret of success (talk) 05:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate for a short while AND Redirect title to Nagathihalli Chandrashekar. What we have here is a film slated to be released in May 2012... less than 60 days... and though a bit weak currently, the topic is not entirely without soucability,[1][2] and we might reasonably expect more as release approaches. My thought is that we can remove it from mainspace and place it in a location where it might benefit from collaborative editing until ready for a return. And in the meantime, it can be spoken of contextually in the notable filmmaker's article. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Schmidt's plan. 86.** IP (talk) 07:15, 3 April 2012 (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.