Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaj Ki Baat

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) Ya sh ! 01:53, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aaj Ki Baat

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

Film of no note. KDS4444^Talk 09:57, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

type:(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)

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

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

And using WP:INDAFD we find "Aaj Ki Baat (1955)" "Leela Chitnis"

Keep Very rare in 1955 for there to be a female filmmaker in (caste and gender-driven) India. Being at the minimum sourcable as her "maiden voyage" as director this meets inclusion consideration even in the lack of online coverage 60 years after release. And while the guideline WP:GNG is nice, in the face of policy, it is not an absolute mandate.Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 14:04, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:46, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article needs expanding not deleting46.208.73.116 (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:47, 22 November 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.