Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sri Ram (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 delete‎. Star Mississippi 02:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Ram (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 was undeleted as a contested PROD, but no improvements could be made. There are no reviews, and there are only passing mentions in sources, except for a website viggy.com which gave content in a news capsule form. The film is also known by alternate spellings "Shri Ram" and "Shreeram", however I could not find any coverage. Jay 💬 10:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Karnataka. Jay 💬 10:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per the nom, this has no identifiable notability. UtherSRG (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~. Finding sources for Kannada films of the early 2000s is a difficult task. Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annavru (2003 film), Viggy can be considered as a reliable source for older Kannada films (since the writers are hired and the articles are entirely about the film). This source from August 2003 claims that the film was still running (the film released in May 2003). If someone can help navigate the Deccan Herald archives, we can search for a review. DareshMohan (talk) 09:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As metioned, viggy is the only source with any substantial content, but even that is in capsule form. Perhaps move this to draftspace to give time to someone to look at the archives? Jay 💬 11:53, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay: There is no reviews in the archives. Close the discussion. DareshMohan (talk) 08:03, 1 May 2023 (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.