From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
|
 |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
|
*”’Comment”’. If this is kept, it should be moved to [[King (2026 film)]], which is currently a redirect to [[Shah Rukh Khan filmography]]. –[[User:Metropolitan90|Metropolitan90]] [[User talk:Metropolitan90|(talk)]] 18:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC) |
*”’Comment”’. If this is kept, it should be moved to [[King (2026 film)]], which is currently a redirect to [[Shah Rukh Khan filmography]]. –[[User:Metropolitan90|Metropolitan90]] [[User talk:Metropolitan90|(talk)]] 18:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC) |
||
|
* ”’Draftify”’: Though principal photography has started, news about the film’s production is largely sourced to social media speculation (as is nearly everything else in the article). I tried to clean up the promotional language some. It’s currently too soon for this to be in mainspace and does not meet the other critera of [[WP:NFF]]. Also, some references like [https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/ed-sheeran-srk-bollywood-song-king-101709010345679.html this one] link to 404 errors. I just had to remove 2. — [[User:Reconrabbit|<span style=”color:#4E8321″>Recon</span>]][[User talk:Reconrabbit|<span class=”skin-invert” style=”color:#073131″>rabbit</span>]] 20:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC) <!–VCB Reconrabbit–> |
* ”’Draftify”’: Though principal photography has started, news about the film’s production is largely sourced to social media speculation (as is nearly everything else in the article). I tried to clean up the promotional language some. It’s currently too soon for this to be in mainspace and does not meet the other critera of [[WP:NFF]]. Also, some references like [https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/ed-sheeran-srk-bollywood-song-king-101709010345679.html this one] link to 404 errors. I just had to remove 2. — [[User:Reconrabbit|<span style=”color:#4E8321″>Recon</span>]][[User talk:Reconrabbit|<span class=”skin-invert” style=”color:#073131″>rabbit</span>]] 20:10, 21 October 2025 (UTC) <!–VCB Reconrabbit–> |
||
|
*”’Delete”’ – Would support draftify with protection since it would likely just get moved right back to mainspace. The sources are mainly promotional from the production company or general announcements. Unless there is something notable about the production, it fails [[WP:NFF]]. –[[User:CNMall41|CNMall41]] ([[User talk:CNMall41|talk]]) 20:29, 24 October 2025 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 20:29, 24 October 2025
- King (upcoming Indian film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article fails to meet WP:NFILM and WP:GNG. The film is currently unreleased and most of the coverage consists only of basic announcement-type reports without any in-depth, independent critical analysis. Much of the content, especially the marketing section, relies on primary/self-published sources such as Instagram stories and Twitter posts, which are not considered reliable per WP:USERGENERATED. The article also appears to be promotional in tone, which goes against WP:NOTPROMO, and due to the speculative nature of the project’s status, it falls under WP:CRYSTAL. There is no evidence of lasting notability or significant third-party coverage to justify a standalone article at this time.
Morekar (talk) 07:38, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 10. —cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 07:48, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. jolielover♥talk 09:16, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Draftify: Fails in WP:NFF. An article about the film at this stage is nothing but a case of WP:CRYSTAL and violation of WP:NOTPROMO. BhikhariInformer (talk) 09:27, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep It should be edited properly, covered by multiple reliable sources, and meets Wp:notability criteria, so the article should be kept.Star Rider X (talk) 15:33, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep – The article meets WP:GNG and WP:NFILM through significant, independent coverage in multiple reliable sources beyond mere announcements, including recent updates from October 2025. Sources like Pinkvilla (discussing potential November 2 announcement tied to Shah Rukh Khan’s birthday), Sacnilk (production wrap and release details), Times Now (cryptic director teases and 2026 release), The Times of India (cast additions and leaks), Peeping Moon (action sequences and Poland schedule), and News18 (behind-the-scenes peeks) provide in-depth reporting on development, casting, filming, and marketing. This demonstrates sustained media interest and notability for an upcoming high-profile film. While some elements may appear speculative (e.g., unconfirmed rumors), they are attributed to sources and can be edited for neutrality per WP:NPOV; the article is not inherently promotional (WP:NOTPROMO) and avoids WP:CRYSTAL by sticking to reported facts. Draftifying is unnecessary as the coverage justifies a standalone page. The Page Pilot (talk) 19:08, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTPROMO and for failing WP:NFF. Written in an overly promotional tone (which is reflective of the puffery sourcing). I would say draftify per WP:TOOSOON/WP:CRYSTAL but the overt advertising of the language and non-encyclopedic tone makes deletion preferable.4meter4 (talk) 03:17, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
