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 keep. (non-admin closure) GSS (talk|c|em) 18:22, 30 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

18th IIFA Awards[edit]

18th IIFA Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Not sourced. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory Alexf505 (talk) 17:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Keep - the awards are in July, and apparently the nominations have been made already. While WP:CRYSTAL applies, really the only thing that's left to do is fill in who wins. Is it worth deleting this just to reinstate it a month later? Primefac (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Keep. Long-running award whose nominations have been published. Obviously, there's some quality work to be done here to bring this up to the standard of the previous 17 articles in the series, but I'm not particularly sympathetic to the idea that WP:CRYSTAL mandates deletion here; it is almost certain to occur, there is useful content to be included at this point, and we know it will be recreated in about 8 weeks even if deleted, so doing so strikes me as pure bureaucracy. Obviously, this needs some sourcing, but 30 seconds at Google gives no shortage of options to choose from. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yeah, I think I'm going to slap ((in use)) on it since I've already had a few (edit conflict)s cleaning it up. Primefac (talk) 17:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Keep Sourcing has been added, so I'd say the nom's basic concern has been met. Nate • (chatter) 21:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:39, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Keep especially with the improvements and thanks to the editors who supplied them. Since there are articles for the previous 17 I don't think that "Not Directory" applies. MarnetteD|Talk 22:06, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Keep per sourcing and Primefac. I am a approver of keeping articles about events with less than ~5 months to go until it happens. J947^{(c) (m)} 05:38, 27 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Keep: per Primefac. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[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.