Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Africian Raga

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:56, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Africian Raga[edit]

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

This article was turned into a redirect by Lockley. Jerzy has turned the redirect back into an article, which caused AnomieBOT to recreate Category:Articles needing additional categories from February 2013. However, the article is not notable. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 03:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 03:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or change it back to a Redirect. All text is unverifiable (and subsequently fails WP:CRYSTAL), and the topic does not meet WP:NF (in accordance with information given). —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 03:48, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd actually somewhat argue against a redirect unless we can prove that this film is being made and that the production is at least notable enough for a mention on Ghandi's page. I wager that there are likely a lot of films out there about Ghandi, documentary or otherwise, so we should reserve redirects for things that would warrant a mention on his article. So far it's fairly slow going and I'm really not finding much to show that this would be all that good of a redirect. Also, the name of this is "African Raga", so this title is misspelled. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, things like this 2012 blog article give off the impression that this is about Indians in Africa in general, not specifically about Gandhi. I'm wondering if this film wasn't dropped or was released and gained no notice, since I'm not finding much on this at all, just SPS and primary sources from around 2012. I'm leaning more solidly towards a delete. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only mention I can find about this in anything remotely approaching a reliable source is a brief mention in this 2013 article. This is far too brief to warrant inclusion on Wikipedia even as a mention somewhere. Since what little I can find for this film shows that this is about " tracing the 150-year history of Indians in Africa" rather than about Gandhi specifically, I would argue strongly against redirecting it to his page - especially since there's really not enough here to even warrant a mention on his article. If anyone wants to create it in the future if/when this documentary ever gets released, I have no issue with that - it's just that right now this is far, far too soon for an article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:38, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per being TOO SOON. A trailer and minor press was released in 2012, and the official website found using the proper spelling of its name, is still active. Until or unless we get a whole lot more, this does not meet any portion of WP:NF. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 06:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unfortunately, not enough coverage or developments here, yet. — Cirt (talk) 09:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Tokyogirl79's solid reasoning above. --Lockley (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: For the record, that's the kind of process i was hoping i would trigger. I think most of you looked at it more carefully than i, and i think the only useful thing i can add to the discussion is that since "Ghandi Ji" (or whatever the correct punctuation and casing is) combines the surname with a term of high religious respect -- my impression is that it would roughly parallel "St. Mohandas" (but for the detail that some niggling theological disagreements will probably stand in the way of a Catholic canonization process for at least a few more generations) and thus for most English-language contexts, it is

too close to being redundant (for identification purposes), and

too confusing for many English-as-first-language speakers, to count as a clarification about which Ghandi we have in mind.

--Jerzy•t 21:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 26 October 2015 (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.