Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punch Dialogue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 delete. Sr13 02:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Punch Dialogue

Punch Dialogue (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unencyclopedic fancruft Sarvagnya 09:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- Sarvagnya 09:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Kappa 09:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
    Care to provide a reason for keep? T Rex | talk 15:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. It would probably take an editorial genius to make this article encyclopedic. It would fail wiki policies on a number of counts...for starters, citations from RS. This could, at best, be an entertaining blog entry. Lotlil 13:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and WP:OR. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 15:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I removed the uncited (and OR) examples section. This site qualifies as a "reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term—not books and papers that use the term." under WP:NEO Corpx 17:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Even after you removed the fancruft, what is left there is still OR. And no. Behindwoods is not RS. It is just another self styled 'expert'. And not to mention the very term is a neologism and not notable enough. There are zillion 'intricacies' of this sort in the Indian film industry and we really shouldnt be having articles on each of those trivialities. Sarvagnya 18:21, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per lack of "reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term—not books and papers that use the term." Corpx 19:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - not suitable for an encyclopedia and lack of reliable citations that could support this article -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits07:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. -- Naveen (talk) 08:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
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.