Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aradhana (1976 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:28, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aradhana (1976 film)

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

~~Fails WP:NFILM, WP:GNG. -- HindWiki^Connect 16:03, 2 January 2018 (UTC)~~ — HindWIKI (talk • contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Singer Jethu Sisodiya (talk • contribs). – Struck above comment from blocked sock per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Sam Sailor 20:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year!!! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:05, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Happy New Year!!! ^{Babymissfortune} 16:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Keep: ~~I agree, fails WP:FILM.~~ I'm only finding this as a source other than what's cited - and all of those are IMDb-like. Perhaps there are sources in other languages, making this a viable article for the Telugu wiki, e.g. = paul2520 (talk) 19:26, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now convinced the article should stay - to Ammarpad's point that not all 70's movies, especially in other languages, are going to have a ton of web sources. And to Winged Blades of Godric's point, the UIowa reference should be added to the article. = paul2520 (talk) 15:57, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep--This is a good-enough source.A film produced by a well-known director, featuring well-known actors and having songs sung by maestros ought to have got covg. in local sources.And, sources/reviews about Indian film(s) from 1970s (a time from when most newspaper archives aren't online) shall-not be expected to be online/easily available.Winged Blades^Godric 04:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You can't rely on Google search for 1970s movie that clearly predates the internet. Also how does it fails WP:NFILM? saying it fails only without explaining how is not really meaningful. See this review also, and the article has been improved after nomination, another reason for keep –Ammarpad (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep reliable sources have been identified and added so that WP:GNG is passed. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:43, 4 January 2018 (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.