Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bindu (2009 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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bindu (2009 film)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This film has no notable sources - claim to notability is weak to nonexistent --Danielklein (talk) 12:06, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:18, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:18, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep the Sunday Times (Sri Lanka) piece here is significant coverage in a reliable source but more is needed. Reliable national newspaper coverage relates to criteria 1 of WP:NFILM] and your attempt to discount newspaper coverage as non-notable is completely at odds with established policy at WP:GNG and WikiProject Film, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 17:16, 3 February 2020 (UTC) Also coverage at Sunday Observer Atlantic306 (talk) 17:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that the coverage is reliable, however, it is not significant since all films receive such attention at the time of their release. You need to show that there has been significant coverage once the film is no longer a current release. --Danielklein (talk) 22:41, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, reviews at the time of release are sufficient to pass criteria 1 of WP:NFILM and WP:GNG, not all films are reviewed in national newspapers especially independent films so national reviews are selective for example the Hindu only reviews a small sample of the many Indian films released each week. Also, WP:Notability is not temporary also applies although it is good to have later coverage it is not essential, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:45, 5 February 2020 (UTC) Also i've only gone for weak keep because these two pieces are not actual reviews they are preview stories before the cinema release and so what is needed are two actual reviews of the film in reliable sources, although these two sources do count towards WP:GNG, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have found this source here which suggests the film broke box office records when it was released, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 17:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, that was an opinion piece written by a reader of the Daily News. The only attribution I can find for it is an email address. Bindu has only a passing mention, which the guidelines clearly say is not enough to establish notability. "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention" If "[...] the ‘family film’ Bindu smashing all-time records." can be verified (and also which records were smashed? It's not clear) then this film is on its way to being notable. I see nothing in WP:GNG that a single review published around the time of film's release is significant coverage. See WP:NFO. "[...] has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics", "Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release", etc. "In almost all cases, a thorough search for independent, third-party reliable sources will be successful for a film meeting one or more of these criteria." If Bindu is as notable as you claim, it shouldn't be as hard as this to find evidence of notability. However, that by itself is not enough to prove that it's not notable, which is why we're going through this process. WP:NRV "No subject is automatically or inherently notable merely because it exists: the evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere short-term interest, nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity". You are correct that notability is not temporary, however, short-term interest does not establish notability. --Danielklein (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- it's a column by a journalist, note the comment this is not a film review column Atlantic306 (talk) 00:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, b uidhe 02:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep User:Atlantic306 has done a pretty good job finding sources. Foreign articles like this are always hard to evaluate because it is hard to research as an English speaker. That it was directed by what appears to be one of the top directors in Sri Lanka, in combination with the hints we get in English language sources, makes me feel that this probably is notable. All statements currently in the article are verifiably cited, so no reasons to delete based on quality. Antrocent (♫♬) 02:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You could list a hundred sources without establishing notability if they're the wrong sources. I've searched for both "Bindu" and "බිංදු" (and "බින්දු" which appears to be a misspelling) and found nothing notable relating to the film. There are hits from YouTube, Facebook, Blogspot, etc. but nothing usable on Wikipedia. The issue is not with verifiability (which this film passes with flying colours), but with notability. It doesn't matter what the quality of the article is. Low quality articles can be rewritten, and high quality articles on non-notable subjects should be deleted. All the references so far are from the time the film was released, indicating only short-term interest and promotional activity, or from lists of Sri Lankan films which include all Sri Lankan films, whether notable or not. I'm happy to review any Sinhala sources found, as I have already done for the existing Sinhala reference (from Sarasaviya) which is only a list of the cast and crew. We need more than just hints. We need concrete evidence that this film is notable if it is to be kept. --Danielklein (talk) 06:45, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Sources from the release time are acceptable for GNG, for example there are many film articles about upcoming films particularly Hollywood films that only have references from before the film's release, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:18, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I agree with Antrocent that these topics get less media coverage in Englis language sources. Based on the findings by Atlantic306, the article should be kept. KartikeyaS343 (talk) 08:37, 26 February 2020 (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.