Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kokkarakko (1983 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. Missvain (talk) 16:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kokkarakko (1983 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)

An article about a Tamil film, sourced only to (non-WP:RS) IMDb since creation in 2015. A WP:BEFORE search under both the English and the Tamil titles failed even to turn up the plot. The best I found was this passing mention. I was unable to determine whether or not it has any relationship to the 1995 Malayalam film Kokkarakko. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG. Narky Blert (talk) 11:18, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This film, released in 1983 and the 1995 Malayalam film are two different projects. The 1983 film was much noticed for its songs as well as the lead pair Mahesh and Ilavarasi. The film released in pre internet era won't have much references, but will try to find those and update it. Rajeshbieee (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 11:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 19:57, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication this meets WP:GNG nothing in the article, nothing found on google to support notability. Jeepday (talk) 01:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The film released in pre internet era won't have much internet references, but I have updated two references. The film was well noticed for his music.Rajeshbieee (talk) 13:38, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 04:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete per nom. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG. I don't buy the rationale of Rajeshbieee. We need to demonstrate that it meets the below:

The general notability guideline states: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list."

The film is widely distributed and has received full-length reviews by two or more nationally known critics.

The film is historically notable, as evidenced by one or more of the following:

Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release.

The film was deemed notable by a broad survey of film critics, academics, or movie professionals, when such a poll was conducted at least five years after the film's release.

The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release.

The film was featured as part of a documentary, program, or retrospective on the history of cinema.

The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.

The film was selected for preservation in a national archive.

The film is "taught" as a subject at an accredited university or college with a notable film program.

Now about the references:

The first one looks like a blog entry and mentions the subject of this article in passing. So the reference is NOT really a reference and should be removed.

The second reference mention the movie when listing all the movie made by the director. "Films like Kozhi Koothu, Kokkarakko, Gitanjali, Ananthakkummi, Rajathirajah were made by Ilayaraja Kudumbatha." So, fails too.

I think this article fails all of the above. Unless we can find any evidence that it doesn't. So far there is none.

Thanks, Kolma8 (talk) 08:03, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A link to the policy is enough, you don't have to regurgitate it on tens of AFD discussions Atlantic306 (talk) 00:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - we would need to see references giving this film more than a passing mention for it to meet notability criteria; since this lacks evidence of any archive listings, reviews or awards, I would have to agree with deletion for now Spiderone 10:58, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ - The film was released in pre internet era, therefore won't have much internet references, but I have updated one more reference.Rajeshbieee (talk) 10:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rajeshbieee: I think you already voted once on this on 17 December, see above. Kolma8 (talk) 08:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've struck the duplicate vote Spiderone 11:54, 29 December 2020 (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.