Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jai Hanuman (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 redirect‎ to Hanu-Man. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jai Hanuman (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)

The current sourcing is just about first look, and no SIGCOV sources were found. The article fails to meet WP:GNG. Also, the shooting of the film has not started, as this is a sequel to Hanu-Man. I will request a redirect to that article until it passes GNG or NFILM. GrabUp - Talk 07:50, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. GrabUp - Talk 07:50, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft lack of proper citation as its too early. UzbukUdash (talk) 04:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Since only the poster (as a First Look) was released a day ago, there may not be enough verified information or notable media coverage to establish this upcoming film's significance at this time. WP:TOOSOON.This vote is part of my training and assessment activities at NPP School. Charlie (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: as a very anticipated film, as existing coverage shows; or redirect to Hanu-Man#Future until consensus is to revert and expand, if other users think it's better. Absolutely opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GrabUp, can I ask why you didn't discuss Redirect on the article TP or with the main contributor if this is the outcome you suggest? -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:52, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mushy Yank: It’s my opinion, and I’m uncertain whether it should be redirected or deleted. I didn’t want to do the redirect myself due to this uncertainty, so I took it to AfD. There’s no way this article can be kept now, and I thought a bold redirect could be challenged, which Charlie proved. I can see that they think this article should be deleted. GrabUp - Talk 10:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying! -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, There’s no better place than AfD to determine its notability. A talk page discussion would likely have fewer editors involved, possibly just me and the author. GrabUp - Talk 11:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But, precisely, if the creator agrees on a Redirect, it's an easily-reached consensus. But never mind, that's not a problem and you did well to nominate it if you think it's fairer. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hanu-Man: Per WP:NFF and WP:TOOSOON. Charliehdb (talk) 11:08, 2 November 2024 (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.