Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shankarabaranam (2015 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) –Davey2010^Talk 00:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shankarabaranam (2015 Film)[edit]

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

Unsourced crystal violation Hell in a Bucket (talk) 21:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 22:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 22:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

and the Telugu news source search translated

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

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

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

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

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

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

and WP:INDAFD: Shankarabaranam "Uday Nanadavanam" "M.V.V. Sathyanarayana" "Kona Venkat" "Nikhil Siddharth" "Nanditha Raj" Anjali "Sampath Raj" "Rao Ramesh"

Comment: Really sad when a brand new article is offered unsourced to Wikipedia (sorry author) and leaves editors and nominator perhaps wondering if the topic is actually notable or not. So... I performed by own WP:BEFORE and found that not only had filming begun last June, it completed on October 10th... so, under WP:BURDEN we have no crystal violation. I will do some expansion and sourcing to article to address the nominator's other huge (and simply) worry that it is unsourced and then report back. Since filming is verifiable and the production has coverage, it may meet WP:NFF (paragraph 3). Back soon. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 00:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP and continue expansion and improvements over time and through regular editing. After my reserach, I wwas able to perform some minor improvements and added sources to the article... an addressable issue not requiring deletion. And, as filming HAS begun and completed AND the production is receiving coverage, it appears we have a quite suitable stub class article whose topic meets inclusion criteria of WP:NFF (paragraph). Perfect now? Nope. Improvable? Definitely. So... while quite stubby now, it serves the project to have it remain and be improved over time. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as (1) Filming has already begun, and (2) Nice secondary source coverage. — Cirt (talk) 09:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep and I would've closed this as such but I'll see if any votes add to this, as the fact it's going to be released soon may cause more attention. SwisterTwister talk 01:40, 25 October 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.