| Revision as of 19:27, 25 October 2006 edit69.138.37.99 (talk) →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:10, 25 October 2006 edit undoCentrx (talk | contribs)37,287 editsm Reverted edits by 69.138.37.99 (talk) to last version by ColourBurstNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| * '''Comment'''. Bollywood is a high output genre, and even given the concern about removing systemic biases, most Bollywood films should be considered to be non-notable given that high output. --] (]) 17:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC) | * '''Comment'''. Bollywood is a high output genre, and even given the concern about removing systemic biases, most Bollywood films should be considered to be non-notable given that high output. --] (]) 17:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :* '''Comment'''. I would accept another reasoning for deletion, but not because "Bollywood is a high output genre", given the terms of ]. The notability criteria of film does not talk about output of the industry it's involved in; it only cares about whether "The film has been theatrically released nationwide in a country, or into 200 or more commercial theaters." If this film has, then it passes. If not, it fails. ] 18:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC) | :* '''Comment'''. I would accept another reasoning for deletion, but not because "Bollywood is a high output genre", given the terms of ]. The notability criteria of film does not talk about output of the industry it's involved in; it only cares about whether "The film has been theatrically released nationwide in a country, or into 200 or more commercial theaters." If this film has, then it passes. If not, it fails. ] 18:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Keep''' - Research shows this is a common term. The user Nlu has been very quick to delete several articles, and has harrassed authors of such pages. | |||
Revision as of 21:10, 25 October 2006
Shart
The article was apparently previously AfDed, but the prior AfD appears to be for a totally different context. This current article is about a Bollywood film with no assertion of notability. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 05:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: previous afd is for an article about a combination of excrement and flatulence. --Daniel Olsen 06:05, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Currently Neutral May be non-notable and certainly is a stub, but I did a search and it looks like it very well could be a well-known Bollywood, at least in India (which, keep in mind, has a population 3 times that of the US). Given Misplaced Pages's drive to remove systemic bias it's important not to delete foreign movies and such too hastily. If anyone knows more about Bollywood movies they should comment. --The Way 06:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep 1969 movie. The IMDB is . The lead actor and actress are accomplished Bollywood stars. There were two other movies with the same title Shart (1953) and Shart (1986). Bejnar 06:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Positively minded because it is Bollywood after all, a bit dubious because I do not know how known this film is in India. It did not google too well, but that does not mean much, because of the different alphabet. There seem to be a lot of these films called "Shart". "Shart: the Challenge" (2004) seems better known than the 1969 one. Disambiguation page? --Pan Gerwazy 17:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Bollywood is a high output genre, and even given the concern about removing systemic biases, most Bollywood films should be considered to be non-notable given that high output. --Nlu (talk) 17:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I would accept another reasoning for deletion, but not because "Bollywood is a high output genre", given the terms of WP:NOTFILM. The notability criteria of film does not talk about output of the industry it's involved in; it only cares about whether "The film has been theatrically released nationwide in a country, or into 200 or more commercial theaters." If this film has, then it passes. If not, it fails. ColourBurst 18:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)