Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tere Ishk Mein

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 Draftify‎. Moving this article to Draft space doesn't prevent editors from improving this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:27, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tere Ishk Mein

[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)

This article on an upcoming film does not meet WP:NFF. NFF says upcoming films "should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines". There's minimal information in the production section, with the sources basically being pre-release publicity fluff. A draft article exists already, so moving this to draft was not an immediate option. This would be a good candidate to DRAFTIFY this version. Ravensfire (talk) 00:05, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. Ravensfire (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: Very minimal production coverage. Definitely not enough to satisfy WP:NFF. As of the other draft, delete that one. Editors can continue to work upon this one's drafted version. BhikhariInformer (talk) 02:33, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — Since the nomination, the article has been updated with multiple independent, reliable sources documenting the film's teaser, production credits and media reaction. Notably:

The Telegraph (India) published a descriptive piece that describes scenes in the teaser, discusses themes of heartbreak and explicitly links the film to the director's earlier work (Raanjhanaa). [1]
Hindustan Times ran a feature describing the teaser, its themes ("loss and longing") and the Rahman score.[2]
ThePrint (PTI feed) carried the teaser release and production details (release date, music credits), demonstrating national wire pickup.[3]
Deccan Chronicle recorded measurable social media/fan reaction to the teaser, documenting public interest [4]

Taken together, these pieces represent multiple independent, reliable sources with descriptive/analytical reporting (not just brief casting announcements). For these reasons, the subject currently meets WP:GNG and the article satisfies WP:NFF's allowance for notable productions. I recommend Keep (mainspace) provided the article is promptly edited to remove promotional wording and every factual statement is inline-cited to the sources above. Deepaknaik1988 (talk) 08:39, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What you've added is Wikipedia:Citation overkill#Notability bomb - lots of VERY similar references that don't add anything new to the article. That's actually less then helpful as it just looks like you're trying to find anything that might stick against the wall. And will all of those excessive, similar references, the same problem still exists that led me to start this AFD. Ravensfire (talk) 03:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I understand the concern about citation overkill. To address that, I will trim down the references to focus only on the strongest, most distinct sources (e.g., The Telegraph, Hindustan Times, ThePrint/PTI, Deccan Chronicle, Variety) and remove redundant "teaser release" links. I'll also work on improving the article prose to keep it neutral, well-cited, and policy-compliant. With those improvements, the article will clearly reflect significant independent coverage without excessive duplication.

The current references are from four independent, mainstream sources that each provide something distinct:

The Telegraph India describes specific scenes from the teaser and explicitly connects the film to Raanjhanaa (substantive analysis, not routine).
Hindustan Times interprets the teaser thematically ("loss and longing") and discusses Rahman's score.
ThePrint/PTI piece shows national wire distribution, confirming the film's coverage beyond just entertainment blogs.
Deccan Chronicle covers public/fan response, documenting measurable reception.

Together, these aren't duplicate routine mentions — they're complementary coverage from multiple independent outlets. That goes beyond WP:NOTNEWS, satisfies WP:GNG, and under WP:NFF demonstrates that the production has already attracted significant independent attention. Deepaknaik1988 (talk) 18:15, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use AI LLM to generate messages. I will not respond to them as I want to collaborate with you, the person, not the words from a LLM that regurgitate what it has scraped and doesn't show what you have learned. Ravensfire (talk) 19:33, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you. I'm writing my own responses here. I've trimmed down the sources and improved the article myself. I'll make sure my comments stay short and to the point, based directly on the policies (WP:GNG, WP:NFF, WP:V). Thanks for the feedback. Deepaknaik1988 (talk) 19:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Please read WP:NFF, as that's what's important here as this is an upcoming film. Is the production section notable by itself? Clearly, it's not. It very basic in details, the sources are basically pre-release publicity fluff that repeat talking points from the producers and/or cast, not good independent coverage. Look at Thamma or The Taj Story - both have far more development around the production of the film. Having this moved the draft, developed in there and then accepted by a reviewer is probably the best case. Quite a few upcoming films don't have articles until the release. It's probably more normal not to have the article early, then get one started and published once it's shown and reviews come in. Ravensfire (talk) 20:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have cut the article back to a few solid sources that give more than just routine promo. That shows the film already has some independent coverage. I get the WP:NFF concerns though, if not kept, I do support Draftify so the work isn't lost and can be expanded once reviews come out. Deepaknaik1988 (talk) 07:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: Deepaknaik1988 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 22:07, 8 October 2025 (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.