Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7½ Phere
per easily meeting  and |snow close. I was |'''sorely tempted''' to close this early myself per the {{u|Besieged|nominator's}} many errors and his poor "quick search", but hope that an expanded explanation may help him in his future edits.  Apparently, the article was brought here because it was unsourced, when even a minimal  would have shown |multiple sources available.https://4d1fac7452666a9f1a1e7b6fa5af791fa725173b.googledrive.com/host/0B3ke7sJYbO1gVkRjUVh6bmtqeVU/IndianEnglishNewspaperSearch.html#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=%227%C2%BD%20Phere%22&gsc.sort=http://searchindiannews.in/#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=%227%C2%BD%20Phere%22&gsc.sort=  He mentioned IMDB in a dismissive manner up above but fails to note that even '''IT''' listed numerous reviews.http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453582/externalreviews... some http://www.apunkachoice.com/movies/mov545/7_1_2_phere-review.html quite http://www.indiaglitz.com/channels/hindi/review/7630.html substantive and even one in http://ia.rediff.com/movies/2005/jul/30phere.htm German  An article being unsourced is not a valid #REASON|deletion criteria. Per , topic notability is dependent upon sources being available, and not upon their use or not within an article. And in looking at , if the GNG is met, we do not ignore it and look to |"other attributes to consider" which are NOT notability criteria, but are set only to encourage due diligence.  An Indian film does not have to be notable outside of India and he grants an inability to read or find possible Hindi sources, so I would encourage him please, to avoid areas he admits to being unable to judge
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 19:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NF||WP:SNOW||WP:IAR||WP:BEFORE||WP:GNG||WP:DEL||WP:NRVE||WP:NF||WP:OEN (Wikipedia:Notability)