Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mishor Rohoshyo

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.

Mishor Rohoshyo[edit]

The result was Nomination withdrawn. I'm now convinced of its notability and the article has been improved considerably. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Multiple issues plague this article, it's unreferenced, it's unreleased, and I can't find anything on the web that isn't primary, let alone any WP:RS. Unless someone can provide reliable Bengali sources, this is WP:TOOSOON, it seems. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 19:25, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NFILM as best as I can tell. Unless someone has access to sources that I don't that show notability, I see no reason to keep this. Ducknish (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's enough sources now that I'm willing to keep this. Ducknish (talk) 03:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm finding some hits under the spelling of "Mishor Rahasya", although not much. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:56, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some sources and I was able to find where part of the filming has already wrapped up, but the big issue here is that the ToI is the only paper that has commented on the film production. They've somewhat fallen all over themselves, so I'm wondering if there are other sources out there under yet another spelling? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Kakababu#Portrayal_in_film. Right now there's just enough to show that the film will likely become notable when it releases, but there's not enough in the here and now to show it passes WP:NFF. There's the ToI, but we need more than coverage by one paper to really show a depth of coverage. I discovered an article for the fictional character and while it does need work, this seems like a reasonable redirect to that article until the movie receives more coverage.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've certainly got no issue with a redirect - I would concur that it is likely to become notable, and that's precisely why I cited WP:TOOSOON in the nom. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 13:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per significant coverage. NickCochrane (talk) 22:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The principal photography is complete, and release date set. This meets notability.--Dwaipayan (talk) 14:13, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The film has got significant coverage in WP:RS, and the principal photography has also ended, meets the criteria of WP:NFILMS. 14:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Keep per adequately meeting WP:NF. While certainly the nominated version[1] needed work, a little due diligence by Tokyogirl79 addressed the nominator's concerns.[2] Per WP:NOTCLEANUP We do not usually delete notable topics simply because an improvable article needs work. As we now have a sourced article on a completed film due for release, perhaps the nom might consider a withdrawal? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would think about a withdrawal, but there's a delete vote still there: so I can't. I know AfD isn't cleanup, but there wasn't any real sign of notability when I nominated it, nor from a Google search. The flaws with the article were a secondary part of the nom. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:11, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

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.