Wikipedia:articles For Deletion Eashvar Karthic

Eashvar Karthic

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Main issue: the 2nd film of the director never released --> WP:TOOEARLY. This guy only directed one released film, not meeting Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative professionals since the film received mixed reviews. The notabliity guidleine states that the director creates a "well-known work or collective body of work". As of 2024, the work is not well known, it is a single film with mixed reviews, not a critically acclaimed film. I don't know if a writeup by an assistant professor at American College, Madurai holds any weightage but that info can be added to Penguin, the director's only released film. The deletion was caused by an undo of a redirect to Penguin. Long sources are mainly direct interviews about Penguin, not independent. Acting roles seem minor and not notable.

If anybody who directs one film, gets an article, doesn't this set a bad precedent. The film didn't win a National Award or any award for that matter.

This source [1] talks about six films including Penguin, all of this information pertaining to Penguin should be moved to the film article. This director can be notable after more of his works release. DareshMohan ( talk) 22:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India. Shellwood ( talk) 23:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: if you are wondering what the contents of source #7 is, it is here: [2] The story focuses on the pain and struggles suffered by the female lead. A pregnant woman remembers her child who went missing years ago. After the child’s missing, her husband started becoming toxic by saying she was the reason for the loss and separated ways from her. Later after years, a male character was shown who accepted her as she is and started living happily with her. No strong characterization or importance was given to both these male roles. They are just part of the screenplay.

That's just the plot of the film. How is it scholarly analysis? The assistant professor mentioned above [3] (page 100) is the only significant analysis but that is of the film and can be added to Penguin.

Just redirect to Penguin till Zebra (his second film) releases. DareshMohan ( talk) 23:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep: meets WP:DIRECTOR as director of Penguin (film), a notable creation that received coverage, which is what the guideline requires (the said coverage mentions him, see the page about the film). - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Redirect to Penguin (film): His only directorial credit. The second one has been unreleased for over a year, and doesn't have a Wiki article. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete Fails WP:Actor and WP:Director. AmericanY ( talk) 06:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)— AmericanY ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Keep: This seems like a bad-faith nomination and I believe you are upset about your friend, User:Monhiroe's autopatrolled rights being removed. You first edited this article on 8 October 2023, what changed your mind between then and 19 June, 2024, when you redirected it? Did it take eight months for you to judge its notability? On 19 June, you skimmed through all the articles I have ever created and made some changes on three of them [4] [5] [6]. Was it to check which ones you could nominate for deletion but couldn't find any, so you thought Eashvar Karthic was borderline because he had only one film and chose to redirect it? Is this how you get back at an editor who may have upset your friend?

The notice you have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force is not neutral and did not follow WP:APPNOTE. Is your nomination rationale so weak that you are trying to discredit a source simultaneously?

Notability

The main issue you have mentioned in you nomination rationale is countered by WP:FILMMAKER#3 where it explicitly mentions significant or well-known work. It need not be a collective body of work.
I believe the film receiving mixed reviews has no weightage here as we are not debating for WP:FILMMAKER#4c
As of 2024, the work is not well known, it is a single film with mixed reviews, not a critically acclaimed film. - Adding to my previous comments above, the film has been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, which can be verified by checking Penguin (film).
Apart from the above, the film has been cited in journals for three completely different reasons: A film that discusses women-centric films, OTT during the COVID-19 pandemic and representation of the subaltern.
If you had taken the time to read through Source #7, you would have known that the PDF you have linked is another journal that has cited the original source #7's work. In the PDF you have linked, Penguin (film) was selected as one of the films out of all the other women-centric films that were released in 2020. The scholarly analysis is in the findings and conclusion section of the same PDF. The journal entry's objective is independent of the subject, so it's absurd to ask for an analysis about the film when the objective is different.
FWIW, here is another journal that extensively cites the subject's work.

There is significant coverage about the subject and their work. Penguin (film) has also received independent periodical articles, reviews and cited in multiple journals, thereby passing the WP:FILMMAKER criteria. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 09:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello Jeraxmoira, I completely agree with you on the notability of this director and, like you, I do indeed disagree with DareshMohan's interpretation of the guideline in the present case, but is your very aggressive opening statement absolutely necessary? I am inviting you to kindly strike it. I don't think it's appropriate here, nor helpful. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Any bad-faith nomination will be called out. My statement is true and the diffs/timeline make it clear, so it will not be struck out. Jeraxmoira🐉 ( talk) 11:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect to Penguin (film): he has done only 1 film its better he done atleast 3 or 4 movies. Another film he directed was not released yet. WP:TOOEARLY. Monhiroe ( talk) 09:49, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete or Redirect to Penguin (film). Case of WP:TOOSOON with only 1 release under this director and has not garnered significant achievement to satisfy notability. RangersRus ( talk) 13:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: I agree with the analyses of Mushy Yank and Jeraxmoira wrt Penguin meeting GNG via sufficient reviews, thus Karthic automatically passing NCREATIVE#3 and therefore being automatically considered notable by the wording of NCREATIVE's header. I don't like it, but individual AFDs aren't a great place to overrule clear guidelines so I've started a discussion at NBIO Talk because NCREATIVE#3 is clearly a much lower standard (at the lower bound) from the other criteria. That also said, I also suspect that when Zebra is released that it will also receive more than sufficient reviews to pass NFILM [7] [8], there will be no good single redirect target, and Karthic will pass my proposed modified NCREATIVE#3 anyway, so a WP:NOPAGE redirect would likely be short-lived. ^~ Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~
(Talk)~ 09:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC) reply