Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HARA-KIRI

HARA-KIRI

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Film has not started shooting yet, which means it fails WP:NFILMS, and there are no sources provided to show WP:GNG notability. I can't find any sources (though it's a tricky subject to Google for - there have been several films with similar titles). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't meet WP:NFF and there is no prejudice to recreating this in the future should it prove to meet WP:GNG. Ubelowme (talk) 21:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence that is happening, still less that it is notable. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete along with the problems already mentioned when you look at the edits of the the article creator Julesgladys (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) it looks like we may have a WP:COI and/or selfpromotion situation occurring. MarnetteD | Talk 22:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the poster child of TOOSOON. Lack of sources speaking toward the project make deletion a no-brainer. I might have suggested a redirect to the film's director, but his own article is soon to be speedied as an unverifiable BLP violation. As for a redirect to the article on the producer, Jules Gladys, it is itself weak enough to likely end up at AFD as well. No coverage + no verifiability = Non-notable. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]