Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/24 Mani Neram: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:53, 26 September 2020 editJoe Roe (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Administrators41,994 edits Relisting discussion (XFDcloser)← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:21, 16 October 2020 edit undoSpartaz (talk | contribs)Administrators52,772 edits →24 Mani Neram: Closed as no consensus (XFDcloser) 
(5 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
⚫ ===]===
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|M}}
<!--Template:Afd top


Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''no consensus'''. I think the balance from the analysis is against the sources but it was late in the discussion contributions post this are just not convincingly swayed by this for me to feel comfortable deleting or that this was the winning argument. ] <sup>'']''</sup> 20:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
⚫ ===]===
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude> <noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
:{{la|24 Mani Neram}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>) :{{la|24 Mani Neram}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>)
:({{Find sources AFD|title=24 Mani Neram}}) :({{Find sources AFD|title=24 Mani Neram}})
Non notable film, with nothing found in a ] search except film database sites, video clips, and interviews with the director that mention the film. Tagged for over a year for notability. ] (]) 23:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC) Non notable film, with nothing found in a ] search except film database sites, video clips, and interviews with the director that mention the film. Tagged for over a year for notability. ] (]) 23:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Line 16: Line 21:
* '''Keep''' per added sources. --] (]) 19:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC) * '''Keep''' per added sources. --] (]) 19:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' as the article has been expanded with the addition of multiple reliable sources that show a pass of ] so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, ] (]) 21:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC) *'''Keep''' as the article has been expanded with the addition of multiple reliable sources that show a pass of ] so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, ] (]) 21:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per some great ] teamwork by {{u|TamilMirchi}}, {{u|Kailash29792}}, and {{u|Neutral Fan}}. Meets ] or ]. ] (]) 00:49, 25 September 2020 (UTC) *<del>'''Keep'''</del> per some great ] teamwork by {{u|TamilMirchi}}, {{u|Kailash29792}}, and {{u|Neutral Fan}}. Meets ] or ]. ] (]) 00:49, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
**'''Weak keep'''. Having had another look at the sources, I'm not convinced about their reliability. looks promising, especially the bit stating that it ran for around 27 weeks. But, as TB notes below, a fair number of these sources look like blogs. Not knowing Tamil, I can't look for additional sources, so I am admittedly judging these "books" by their "covers". ] (]) 15:57, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
*'''Question and Comment''': Since there were so many Keep votes I went back through the sources so see if I was wrong. I found nothing that comes close to meeting GNG or NFILM. Here is my run down on the sources: *'''Question and Comment''': Since there were so many Keep votes I went back through the sources so see if I was wrong. I found nothing that comes close to meeting GNG or NFILM. Here is my run down on the sources:
:* Bhaskar, Prashant. "Tribute to Manivannan". Behindwoods. :* Bhaskar, Prashant. "Tribute to Manivannan". Behindwoods.
Line 39: Line 45:
* '''Keep:''' the 'added sources' won me over. - ] (]) 13:47, 25 September 2020 (UTC) * '''Keep:''' the 'added sources' won me over. - ] (]) 13:47, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />'''Relisting comment:''' Needs further discussion of {{u|TimothyBlue}}'s source analysis<br /> <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />'''Relisting comment:''' Needs further discussion of {{u|TimothyBlue}}'s source analysis<br />
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &ndash;&#8239;]&nbsp;<small>(])</small> 11:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --><noinclude>]</noinclude></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line --> <small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &ndash;&#8239;]&nbsp;<small>(])</small> 11:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->
*'''Weak Delete''' It's pretty clear that this lacks multiple in-depth reliable sources about it per the good analysis of the them by TimothyBlue. That said, there is the whole "multiple passing mentions can be combined for notability" or whatever thing. Which personally I think is a bad way to do things, but it is what it is. Hence why I'm voting weak delete. Delete because it lacks multiple in-depth reliable sources, weakly though because it has a lot of passing mentions that someone could make a notability guideline based argument due to if they were so inclined. Although, I'm not that person. --] (]) 04:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''the addition of multiple reliable sources has proved notability. ] (]) 16:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ] <sup>'']''</sup> 06:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->
*'''Weak delete''', none of the sources provided have ], although it's a film from the 80s so it is possible that better sources are available. Would need at least a proper review of the film from a source, imv before it could be considered notable. <span style="background-color:#B2BEB5;padding:2px 12px 2px 12px;font-size:10px">] <sub>]</sub></span> 01:56, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 20:21, 16 October 2020

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 no consensus. I think the balance from the analysis is against the sources but it was late in the discussion contributions post this are just not convincingly swayed by this for me to feel comfortable deleting or that this was the winning argument. Spartaz 20:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

24 Mani Neram

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

24 Mani Neram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable film, with nothing found in a WP:BEFORE search except film database sites, video clips, and interviews with the director that mention the film. Tagged for over a year for notability. Donaldd23 (talk) 23:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 23:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 23:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Bhaskar, Prashant. "Tribute to Manivannan". Behindwoods.
This article is about Manivannan, it mentions the film, but does not provide barely any information about the film, let alone directly or in-depth.
  • மறக்க முடியுமா? - மவுன ராகம்". Dinamalar.
This article is about a different film, Mauna Ragam released in 1986. It does not mention the subject at all.
  • "Happy Birthday, Mohan: 'Payanangal Mudivathillai' to 'Mouna Ragam', six films of the lovable star that had a Silver Jubilee in theaters". The Times of India.
This is a birthday tribute to an actor from the film. I mentions the film in one paragraph, but gives no details, let alone addressing the subject directly and in depth.
  • Sunil, K. P. (29 November 1987). "The Anti-Hero". The Illustrated Weekly of India. Vol. 108. The Times Group. pp. 40–41.
Interview which mentions the film, but doesn't provide any details about the film, directly and in depth.
  • "மொட்டைத் தலையுடன் சத்யராஜ் நடித்த நூறாவது நாள்". maalaimalar.com
An article about an actor, it mentions the film in a single sentence, but provides no information directly or in depth.
  • "24 Mani Neram Tamil FIlm EP Vinyl Record by Ilayaraja". Mossymart.
This is an advertisement for a record. Nothing about the movie.
  • "Villains with heroic pasts". The Hindu.
An article about Heroes who turned villains. It mentions the film when it says, "Sathyaraj essayed some powerful antagonistic roles in 24 Mani Neram, Vikram, and Kakki Sattai." This is all. Nothing that meet SIGCOV, directly and in depth.
  • Balasubramaniam, Balaji. "Nooraavadhu Naal". BBthots.
This is a blog article and it's about another movie. It mentions the subject in a list when it says " villain of note with movies like 24 Mani Neram and Kaakki Sattai before..."...but there is no SIGCOV that addresses the subject directly or in-depth.
  • "ஒரே வருடத்தில் மோகன் 15 படங்கள்; ஒரேநாளில் 3 படம் ரிலீஸ்; அத்தனையும் ஹிட்". Hindu Tamil Thisai
Article about an actor. It mentions the film in a list, but that's all.
I ask the keep votes, Neutral Fan, Kailash29792, TamilMirchi, Ab207, Atlantic306, AleatoryPonderings, what am I missing? Which of the above sources show SIGCOV that addresses the subject directly and in depth to meet NFILM or GNG? Show me and I will gladly change my vote to keep.   // Timothy :: talk  03:13, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs further discussion of TimothyBlue's source analysis
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete It's pretty clear that this lacks multiple in-depth reliable sources about it per the good analysis of the them by TimothyBlue. That said, there is the whole "multiple passing mentions can be combined for notability" or whatever thing. Which personally I think is a bad way to do things, but it is what it is. Hence why I'm voting weak delete. Delete because it lacks multiple in-depth reliable sources, weakly though because it has a lot of passing mentions that someone could make a notability guideline based argument due to if they were so inclined. Although, I'm not that person. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:53, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Keepthe addition of multiple reliable sources has proved notability. Wm335td (talk) 16:32, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz 06:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, none of the sources provided have WP:SIGCOV, although it's a film from the 80s so it is possible that better sources are available. Would need at least a proper review of the film from a source, imv before it could be considered notable. Tayi Arajakate Talk 01:56, 16 October 2020 (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.