Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abraham and Lincoln
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 03:48, 11 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
- 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. Although I understand deeptrivia's argument, it doesn't apply in this case because this page was nearly a A1 candidate. If someone wants to actually write an article rather than a bunch of empty headings, they're more than welcome to. Daniel 09:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Abraham and Lincoln[edit]
- Abraham and Lincoln (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Doesn't satisfy notability. rohith 22:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Unless it provides some more content, a lead, explanation of the film, plot, etc. It is a delete.--JForget 22:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- weak delete this does not seem to satisfy any notability requirements. Searching on Google results in about 40 hits but few seem to cast any light on why it should be notable.--Mendors 04:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete. Seems to feature people who may be notable, but just 40 ghits could suggest hoax, failing WP:V, etc.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 11:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I see a lot more than 40 ghits, more like 500, and since it's an Indian film it's inevitably going to have less Internet coverage than, say, an American film of the same importance. Seems like it could be sourcable.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 11:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 23:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Films with notable cast (blue links) are in general notable. To JForget, absence of details points the necessity of expansion not deletion. deeptrivia (talk) 21:55, 9 July 2007 (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.