The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Keep per topic meeting
WP:NFILM. I will not vilify a new editor simply because his edits are limited and show inexperience, and instead look to a film's coverage directly and in some detail in sources such as
Los Angeles Times,
Orlando Sentinel,
TopNews,
iTechPost,
SoundTrack Geek.
These can be added through
regular editing. That his NEW contributions was tagged for a speedy
just one minute after being contributed and while it was being actively edited is worrisome. Deletion of an arguably notable film is not per policy nor guideline and it might have been better to suggest he begin articles in a draftspace. Best for the project is to allow him to add sources.
This article has been sitting out there since 2010, so this isn't an instance of trying to delete something while its being worked on or "vilifying a new editor." Those sources are very shallow, for instance the LA Times does no more than list this movie with the rest of Jessica Biel's work. One is just a one-man blog and doesn't even cover the movie itself. The only one that's close to good is the Orlando sentinel one, which fails
WP:SIGCOV and
WP:SUSTAINED. The movie fails all the tests in
WP:NFO of
WP:NFILM. -
GretLomborg (
talk)
14:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Had this article been brought to AFD back in 2010, I'd have agreed with a deletion. But being released and having coverage, we do have
WP:NF met... even if weakly. Needs more research, thank you. Schmidt, Michael Q.17:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Keep per topic meeting
WP:NFILM. I will not vilify a new editor simply because his edits are limited and show inexperience, and instead look to a film's coverage directly and in some detail in sources such as
Los Angeles Times,
Orlando Sentinel,
TopNews,
iTechPost,
SoundTrack Geek.
These can be added through
regular editing. That his NEW contributions was tagged for a speedy
just one minute after being contributed and while it was being actively edited is worrisome. Deletion of an arguably notable film is not per policy nor guideline and it might have been better to suggest he begin articles in a draftspace. Best for the project is to allow him to add sources.
This article has been sitting out there since 2010, so this isn't an instance of trying to delete something while its being worked on or "vilifying a new editor." Those sources are very shallow, for instance the LA Times does no more than list this movie with the rest of Jessica Biel's work. One is just a one-man blog and doesn't even cover the movie itself. The only one that's close to good is the Orlando sentinel one, which fails
WP:SIGCOV and
WP:SUSTAINED. The movie fails all the tests in
WP:NFO of
WP:NFILM. -
GretLomborg (
talk)
14:38, 7 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Had this article been brought to AFD back in 2010, I'd have agreed with a deletion. But being released and having coverage, we do have
WP:NF met... even if weakly. Needs more research, thank you. Schmidt, Michael Q.17:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.