Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dhoom 3 (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 speedy delete as vandalism. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shootout at taj hotel for further information. Uncle G (talk) 22:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dhoom 3 (film)[edit]

It is already proposed that this upcoming movie may be a hoax. My prod was contested, unsurprisingly, by the original creator of the article. Per WP:CRYSTAL and the complete lack of anything pointing towards this movie being discussed, it falls clearly flat of WP:N. Finally, as it is, most of the movie is about Dhoom 2. If Dhoom 3 is released, it will be notable for an article come that time. But for now, it isn't, and I propose that it be deleted. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 09:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shootout_at_taj_hotel is discussing this movie; I'll vote Delete here as I did at the other AfD. Baileypalblue (talk) 10:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —PC78 (talk) 13:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - hoax, fails WP:NFF. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hathyar 10 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Company 2 for two more hoaxes by the same author. JohnCD (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:NFF. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note Rumours about this film began in 2006 and petered out in 2007[1]. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Abecedare (talk) 04:19, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:CRYSTAL, WP:NFF. Is unsourced and most likely a hoax. Might be speedyable, given the editing history of contributors.Abecedare (talk) 04:20, 22 February 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.