Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Do Paise Ki Dhoop,Char Aane Ki Barish

:{{la|Do Paise Ki Dhoop,Char Aane Ki Barish}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Do Paise Ki Dhoop,Char Aane Ki Barish}})

The movie is not yet notable. WP:MOVIE states that films that but have not yet been publicly released usually shouldn't have their own articles unless the production itself is notable, which it is not. From my searches, the movie hasn't been reviewed by two or more nationally known critics, and it does not meet the other criteria in WP:MOVIE or WP:GNG Inks.LWC (talk) 22:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

• Keep. Of course this movie is notable as it is the first movie directed by Deepti Naval, one of the prominent actors in India of the Middle of the road film genre. This movie also has the most notable actors in the lead roles, Manisha Koirala, and Rajit Kapur, quite prominent in the theatre circuit, which is quite significant in their careers, given the very different kind of roles they have done in this movie, as seen in this article in Midday, [http://www.mid-day.com/entertainment/2011/mar/240311-Manisha-Koirala-Deepti-Naval-Do-Paise-Ki-Dhoop-Char-Aane-Ki-Baarish.htm]. And this movie is a landmark in the emerging trend of queer theme in Indian Cinema, with a person like Deepti Naval directing it, which was greatly appreciated in the LGBT mailing lists. The movie's release to the public is widely expected, as can be seen in the blogs, which I am not allowed to cite as per the neo-wikipedia policy. So this movie satisfies the clauses in the other evidences of notability in the said page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manorathan (talk • contribs) 11:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Manorathan (talk) 18:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. —Manorathan (talk) 18:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Manorathan (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

• Weak Keep references are independent and verifiable.--117.211.84.226 (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Comment But how does it meet the notability requirements? Inks.LWC (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

::Reply When there is a significant coverage by many independent sources, ofcourse the subject is notable. How else can you define notability! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manorathan (talk • contribs) 07:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• Weak keep. Movie not yet released, so not notable. However, reading the article, it seems likely that it will become notable on release. There is therefore an argument for allowing this article to remain and to let this play out. It can always be deleted later if the movie release doesn't happen or if it is a flop. HairyWombat 15:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
• Sorry, but that's not to the point. A movie that is not yet released can be very notable. Care to read Super 8 (film)? On the other hand, that the article reads as if the movie might become notable is an argument for deletion also--it can always be restored. Drmies (talk) 16:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep. Plenty notable per coverage in reliable sources--it's as simple as that. Drmies (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
• Keep per meeting WP:NF. And though awaiting commerical release... the film WAS publicly screened at the 62nd Cannes Film Festival and has received media attention and critical commentary because it HAS been completed and HAS been seen. Guideline requirements for film notability have been met. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:18, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
• Nomination withdrawn Inks.LWC (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2011 (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.