Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dujon Dujonar

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 redirect‎ to List of Bangladeshi films of 1999. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dujon Dujonar

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NFILM, without reviews in independent, reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG as well, coverage is limited to WP:PRIMARYSOURCES and tabloid coverage disallowed per WP:SBST. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Bangladesh. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:12, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Bangladeshi films of 1999 -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:12, 9 August 2024 (UTC) (invited nominator to do so in my DeproD edit summary; not opposed to Keep myself, but his is a standard alternative to deletion when sources exist and cast is notable. I am inviting users who find films/series not notable enough for a standalone page to always consider this possibility.)[reply]
Didn't see that in your edit summary. Not opposed in principle to a redirect but I'd rather have it be stable via an AfD consensus than subject to a revert war. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I would not characterize Prothom Alo, Bhorer Kagoj, Samakal, Somoy News, or Manab Zamin as tabloid coverage, but all of them make only passing mention of the film, and I could find no better sources, so I agree that it is not notable.

Redirect would be a good choice if I believed that the film might become notable in the future, but I don't. Wikipedia's internal search is much better than it used to be, so without a redirect it will return three lists that include the film and eight biographies of people involved in it. Readers can choose the result(s) they're most interested in.

Delete is the better choice, given that the article was created by a block-evading sockpuppet, and is only ineligible for G5 because it was then extensively edited by someone about whom it was concluded "There's certainly some UPE or meatpuppetry going on", even though they could not be linked by technical evidence to the same sockfarm. (They're currently indefed for advertising and promotion.) --Worldbruce (talk) 17:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, consensus is clearly to remove the article. Will the outcome be to delete or redirect?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 21:31, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - I am swayed by Worldbruce's first argument, that readers could select their preferred article via search, but it seems to me that they could do so just as easily and perhaps with better information structure at the Bangladeshi films list. The list names and links to the notable people involved, which makes it easier to navigate. Any useful or notable information could also be added to the list in 'notes', such as the composer's name in case readers were hooked by the soundtrack. StartGrammarTime (talk) 23:07, 18 August 2024 (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.