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. This is somewhat of a tough call. Prior to MichaelQSchmidt's comment, there was a clear consensus to delete; however, given that there was no further evaluation of the sources, I agree with Tim Song's call to relist the AfD. The relist did not result in any further discussion, so I'm going to go with the current consensus and delete it as apparently non-notable. It's worth noting that although Alison22 was blocked as a sockpuppet, they've not engaged in any vote stacking at this particular AfD; thus, their vote is not inherently problematic and I include it in my final interpretation of the discussion. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:29, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha (film)[edit]

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

Related to this AfD. From Blanchardb's prod which was just removed by an IP (and marked as minor, too, which I think is wrong to do (along with re-adding copyrighted material)): "Movie with no assertion of notability." The article creator, Indie Movies, is constantly adding (and, in some cases (like this one), readding previously deleted) non-notable films and has been brought up on the conflict of interest noticeboard twice now (the latest showing that the IP may be a sockpuppet), bringing to light that every film is released by Maverick Entertainment Group. Thejadefalcon ^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 20:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no reliable sources to establish notability. Alison22 (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: Alison22 has been indef blocked as sockpuppet. Pcap ping 02:27, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I've had trouble with this one. A movie titled Maverick in which Natasha Richardson was considered for a major role at one point led to truckloads of false positives. But I was unable to find the needle in that haystack, and so unless I'm mistaken, there are no reliable sources to be found. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I found several instances where DVDs are being sold, and this "press release" review, but I do not see anything to satisfy WP:NF. Johnuniq (talk) 03:26, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Jag Mundhra and source per India Currents, Twitch Film, Film Critics United, Sify, and even perhaps with Bollyvista. Its enough, with work, to bring the article into line. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: relisted to obtain more comments on MichaelQSchmidt's sources. Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2009 (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.