Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raees (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 delete. Mkdw ^talk 01:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Raees (film)[edit]

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

Delete per being TOO SOON and, while being covered in sources, does not have the persistent and enduring coverage to merit being an exception ro WP:NFF paragraph 3. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:14, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:19, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Principal photography not started, so the article fails WP:NFF. Iy also duplicate of article Raees Movie 2015. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:09, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy. I've tagged it as a speedy deletion as a copy of the other article. I've cleaned the article up and I've moved the info to the other article since technically it's an earlier copy. Even so, this is just too soon for an article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That speedy was declined (see article's edit summary). And note: per WP:NCF, THIS ONE's title is the proper title format. As nominator, I would be fine with this being userfied to its author. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 18:22, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 21 December 2013 (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.