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The result was speedy keep, nomination was withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unto the Dusk (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)

This is one of a series of articles created by editors/socks with conflict of interest, who also apparently run some movie and music PR websites; see ANI report and SPI report. Film fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM, and is only mentioned in passing as example of recent independent films in the three cited sources. Abecedare (talk) 17:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Abecedare (talk) 17:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Abecedare (talk) 17:52, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alts

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

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

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

WP:INDAFD: "Sajin Baabu" "Unto the Dusk"

• Keep per meeting WP:NF. Issues with failings of its authors aside, the film itself is covered and more more thoroughly in sources not being used, and thus the topic merits inclusion. For examples, we have Deccan Chronicle, New Indian Express (1), New Indian Express (2), New Indian Express (3), The Hindu, and others. Shame on the COI and sockfarm, but under WP:NRVE we have no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Deal with the bad guys, fine... but save and expand the notable topic accordingly, for our readers. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 11:15, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw Thanks for finding the sources User:MichaelQSchmidt. Can you update/clean-up the article with the sources you found? Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 16:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Just got home, but will be happy to do so. Y Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 05:06, 7 September 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.