Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aduri (2nd nomination)
as just barely, barely meeting . I myself had a hand at removing author's COI, POV and ADVERT to bring it into line with policy and guideline. Earlier author matters not one whit once it belongs to Wiki.... specially if COI, POV, and ADVERT are removed by independent editors with no connection to the project. IMDB might act only to erfy cast crew, but these informations have been erified by othe independent sources http://www.pubfilms.com/movies/V449892 Pub Films,http://movies.msn.com/movies/movie/aduri/ MSN, http://www.moviefone.com/movie/aduri/1395214/main Moviefone, http://www.cinemamontreal.com/aw/crva.aw/que/Montreal/e/22318/Aduri.html Cinema Montreal, http://www.allmovie.com/work/449892 All Movie Guide, http://www.movieclock.com/aw/crva.aw/tn/La_Follette/e/22318/Aduri.html Movie Clock, so besmirching one erification pales when looking at all the others. Thank you for granting that the film exists. Further, the http://www.desichutney.com/article.asp?catID=-1&linkID=8&articleID=19 DesiChurney review is a credible source independent of the film. Stating "equivalent to a blog" (a statement itself not sourced so may only be opinion), is not the same as actually "being a blog". Kinda like saying a Ford Pinto is "equvalent to a indie racecar". "Equivalence" is not the same as "being". And there are still the unaddressed matters of http://passionforcinema.com/%E2%80%9Caduri%E2%80%9D-the-movie-two-perspectives/ Passion for Cinema and http://marylandfilms.com/2008/04/maryland/film-premiere-of-aduri-an-independent-film-may-16th-at-university-of-md-hoff-theater/ Maryland Films. Think they would overlooked if they were not mentioned at the AfD? Its weak, but it meets (barely) the guidelines for inclusion
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 04:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NF||WP:V||WP:V||WP:V (Wikipedia:Notability)