Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oru Second Class Yathra
per meeting . The author's failing to expand and source this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oru_Second_Class_Yathra&action=history new article is sad, but it took but a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oru_Second_Class_Yathra mere 6 minutes to make it more presentable. Per ,  and  this meets inclusion criteria, and while it was originally pretty sparse, it needing work is a more reason to encourage |improvements than it is to ask for deletion. Who else used  to find significant coverage before opining? I quickly found http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/malayalam/movie-reviews/Oru-Second-Class-Yathra/movie-review/47220563.cms ''Times of India'' http://www.nowrunning.com/movie/16672/malayalam/oru-second-class-yathra/5068/review/ ''Now Running'' http://www.ibtimes.co.in/oru-second-class-yathra-movie-review-live-updates-vineeth-sreenivasan-nikki-galrani-starrer-631707 ''Internationa Business Times'' http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/this-trip-is-not-so-pleasant/article7189746.ece ''The Hindu'' http://www.indiaglitz.com/oru-second-class-yathra-malayalam-movie-review-19678.html ''Indiaglitz'' and |many, many https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Oru+Second+Class+Yathra%22&tbm=nws more. Just how much more  is being expected here?  {{u|Wikicology}}, {{u|RHaworth
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 12:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NF||WP:NRVE||WP:SOFIXIT||WP:SEP||WP:IMPROVE||WP:BEFORE||WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV (Wikipedia:Notability)