Deletion of Coolie (1997 film)

Comment: released film receiving media attention in enough |reliable sources to meet  in Bangladesh and encourage a far more diligent prior to nominations. The film has IMDB page which also proved that the film does exist and it's important. As the current coverage is acceptable, the coverage and the quality of articles on other Wikis look good. In my view, enough to slightly passed ILM
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NF)

Comment: The argument for keeping here seems to be that this film is independently notable but examining the sources offered shows they are apparently not about this film itself, but rather about its star.  These are, essentially,  arguments and not helpful.  There needs to be more evidence of coverage that is both independent and significant in order to be notable, and that is missing here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:INHERITED)

Comment: WP:GNG calls for significant coverage that addressess the topic in detail. The cited sources state only the approximate release date; the names of the film, director, co-stars, and two of the supporting actors; and that it was Popy's first film. This is trivial coverage. If you doubt this, consider that  elaborates that newspaper listings, capsule reviews, and listings in comprehensive film guides (all of which would include at least that much information, and likely more) are not significant coverage - they are insufficient to establish notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFSOURCES)

Comment: per meeting  even if |only in Bangladeshi. Sources never have to be substantive just so long as the topic of this 20-year-old film is spoken of directly and enough detail to |prevent original research
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NF||WP:NONENG||WP:NOR)