![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 31 January 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the plot synopsis reads like the back of a dvd cover 24.55.214.41 ( talk) 21:23, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I tagged this for notability when I checked Rotten Tomatoes and found that it had zero reviews from the major critics. The sourcing currently on the article is all just a database and an apologetics organization. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I first removed AiG as a source for anything but their own opinion, as AiG is a notoriously unreliable source, as their history at WP:RSN shows.
However, with further investigation, I am now even removing their own opinion. They do not appear to be a third-party source at all. They are advertised on the film's website, and Answers in Genesis was rounding up sponsors for the film, as they explain in this video and as can be seen on their website. At least one source describes AiG as producing the movie, although I am not sure if that's quite an accurate descriptor of the relationship. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 03:58, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
I just revived the Dove review, pointing to an archive instead of a dead link. However, this film appears to no longer be in the Dove site's large database, leading me to wonder if there was a reason it has been removed and whether we should consider the review retracted. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 21:09, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 31 January 2017. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the plot synopsis reads like the back of a dvd cover 24.55.214.41 ( talk) 21:23, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
I tagged this for notability when I checked Rotten Tomatoes and found that it had zero reviews from the major critics. The sourcing currently on the article is all just a database and an apologetics organization. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 04:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I first removed AiG as a source for anything but their own opinion, as AiG is a notoriously unreliable source, as their history at WP:RSN shows.
However, with further investigation, I am now even removing their own opinion. They do not appear to be a third-party source at all. They are advertised on the film's website, and Answers in Genesis was rounding up sponsors for the film, as they explain in this video and as can be seen on their website. At least one source describes AiG as producing the movie, although I am not sure if that's quite an accurate descriptor of the relationship. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 03:58, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
I just revived the Dove review, pointing to an archive instead of a dead link. However, this film appears to no longer be in the Dove site's large database, leading me to wonder if there was a reason it has been removed and whether we should consider the review retracted. -- Nat Gertler ( talk) 21:09, 20 April 2019 (UTC)