Deletion discussions relating to filmmakers, directors and other non-actor film-related people should no longer be listed on this page. Please list them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers instead. |
Points of interest related to
Film on Wikipedia: History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Style – To-do |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Film. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
Scan for Film AfDs |
The subject lacks substantial coverage in third-party reliable sources, and there is insufficient evidence to meet WP:NFILM. GSS 💬 15:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence that this is a notable film. Can be redirected to George Albert Smith (filmmaker)#Selected filmography. Fram ( talk) 07:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence that this 43-second film is notable, hasn't received significant attention. No good redirect target found. Fram ( talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability for this 2 minute film, just included in some websites but without significant attention (e.g. this or this). No obvious redirect target found, if there is one then redirecting is of course acceptable. Fram ( talk) 07:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication that this is a notable film (well, a 31 second static shot). Apparently not only have we no idea who actually made it (just the producre), but we also don't know what is being shown according to this. Perhaps some list for this and many similar non-notable shorts may be feasible, but at the moment I don't see a good redirect target. Perhaps William Kennedy Dickson filmography, which gives an idea of the number of such ultrashort films that were made (and is clearly incomplete, as e.g. this very one isn't on that list). Fram ( talk) 07:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be an underinclusive and unnecessary duplication of Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, which includes many more theaters which are not on this list. I don't believe this page is particularly useful as a stand-alone list. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is a case of WP:NOTDIR. The most recent AfD closed as no consensus but several of the keep arguments were effectively arguing WP:USEFUL, which is not an appropriate deletion argument. Let'srun ( talk) 19:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:NFILM. Theroadislong ( talk) 21:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Only sourced to the novel itself and the article is only plot with no real-world commentary, besides from its comparison to RMS Queen Mary. Neocorelight ( Talk) 09:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Before search revealed little results outside of sources already in article ( passing mention in variety), fr-wiki article has little else to offer too. Someone should search in dutch but subject might not have another name based off filmfonds.nl source in article. (pinging Mushy Yank de-prodded) Just i yaya 13:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
All in all (and maybe there's more), I'd rather keep this, but that's just me. There's no page about the artist so far. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
My PROD tag was removed, so here we are. This is an older duplicate of Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance. As this award was divided into two categories from 2014 to 2023, the article is also partly a duplicate of Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance, Male and Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance, Female. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
The sources are all about Aranmanai 4, but make no mention of "Baakghost" or "Baak" (except in one source "Baak" is mentioned but it appears to be a character from Aranmanai 4." A hoax? Cleo Cooper ( talk) 06:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think this meets WP:NFILM / WP:GNG. Kept at 2006 AfD, but standards were considerably lower then. Boleyn ( talk) 08:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Delete - Fails WP:NFILM. There's a paragraph in this The Weekly Standard article: [1], doesn't count as significant coverage. -- Mika1h ( talk) 14:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Found zero evidence of notability myself. Mushy Yank added a Variety article which mentions the film, but only very briefly, so I don't take it for much. And even then, if that's all there is then I don't see why this should've been dePRODded in the first place. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 15:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Listicle with minimal coverage (and what it does get is from blog-type websites rather than any major news source). Violates MOS:FILMACCOLADES, specifically the sentence 'Awards bestowed by web-only entities are not generally included'. Survived an AfD in 2013 that was marred by WP:SPA activity. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 14:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Nothing in the article or my BEFORE suggests this meets WP:GNG (or WP:NFILM). Nothing in GBooks or GScholar (well, one mention in a German book?). Maybe there is some coverage in National Lampoon (magazine) ( September/October 1994), but it is a parody magazine, so not sure if it is reliable, and even if there is something there, GNG requires multiple sources (so at least one more). Can anyone find anything to rescue this - or failing that, suggest a valid redirect target? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
*Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A review of newly found sources would be helpful. What would the redirect target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
The review notes: "Julie Brown casts a long, amusing shadow in Showtime's head-strongly dumb "National Lam- poon's Attack of the 5'2" Women," an umbrella title for two films. The kicky pair of satires within spoof two of the media's recent bete noir bad girls, skater-agitator Tonya Harding and impromptu surgeon Lorena Bobbitt, whose fictional counterparts are both played by Brown. Yes, nothing is sacred and all bets are off as "Attack" goes on the offensive, seizing the public personas of Harding and Bobbitt to transmit a picture of cheesy, pulp aspirations, where fame and lame are interchangeable and mass communications is the twisted funnel through which rattles the news. ... Ah, but an instant before this, the missus learns that her recently repaired hubby has been cheating again. Ouch! Sophomoric and crude, and way too long, "Attack" manages to play as a fun-dumb damning of the media-rama."
The review notes: "In this daffy double-header, Julie Brown spoofs two of last year's tabloid inamoratas. First, in an utterly unruly farce, she plays Tonya Hardly. The chain-smoking, asthma-atomizer-sucking, overweight skater is consumed with jealously for her competitor Nancy Cardigan (Khrystyne Haje). ... While this pair of infamous headline-generators present perfect targets for Brown's raucous, ribald satire, the fact is that both episodes seem a little dated already. Nothing goes stale faster than a juicy tabloid scandal. Grade: B+"
The review notes: "In NATIONAL LAMPOON'S ATTACK OF THE 5'2" WOMEN (Showtime, Sunday, 8-9:30 p.m.), the very funny, very brazen star of Medusa: Dare to Be Truthful, the wicked 1991 parody of Madonna's Truth or Dare parody, sinks her fangs into two notorious women of recent headlines, figure skater Tonya Harding and spouse mutilator Lorena Bobbitt, and doesn't let go. As she did in Medusa, Brown ... sticks closely to the original text; in this case, her text is the chronology of Harding's bumbling plot to sideline her hated rival, Nancy Kerrigan, and Bobbitt's bumbling plan to sideline her hated husband, John Wayne Bobbitt. ... That Attack of the 5'2" Women flags is due to its length--90 minutes is a hell of a long way to go for two jokes--as well as to the datedness of its situations. There are no two recent, overreported media stories richer for comedy by and about women than those of Harding and Bobbitt, and, consequently, we've already seen and heard a heap. This quarry is too easy. In the name of comedy sisterhood, Julie Brown should lace up her bustier and work at a tougher assignment--say, whipping sketch comedy into shape. She TV: C+ At-tack of the 5'2" Women: B-. "
The review ntoes: "For, though everyone would recognize John Wayne Bobbitt (or Juan Wayne, as his wife calls him here) as the funnier figure from his subsequent deadpan attempts to cash in on his celebrity, Brown hogs the comedy in this half with her Venezuelan accent and a macha swagger that doesn’t quite square with anyone’s worst picture of the real Lorena. As a targetless spoof, it’s, well, satirically challenged."
The review notes: "Brown’s brilliant Madonna satire, “Medusa: Dare to Be Truthful,” and her campy novelty hit songs like “Homecoming Queen’s Got a Gun” point to her obvious skill. But “Attack of the 5’2″ Women” comes off no better than a latter-day National Lampoon, where the philosophy has descended to the point where anything is allowed, and it would be good if at least some of it were funny."
The review notes: "The humor in "Tonya: The Battle of Wounded Knee" and "He Never Give Me Orgasm: The Lenora Babbitt Story" is broad - Ms. Harding's behind, for instance, is the target of many a joke. And the panting media, perfect prey, escape virtually unscathed. Ms. Brown plays both women as conniving, clueless and exceedingly tacky. The adjectives "gross" and "cheap" also come to mind - for example, when, in trying to attract "Juan Wayne," Ms. Babbitt licks a jukebox. Meanwhile, "Tonya Hardly" cuts her pizza with her skates, while her ditzy competitor "Nancy Cardigan" endorses pork with the line, "It's really neat." Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women isn't."
The review notes: "This elevation of tackiness to an art form is what we get from Julie Brown in "National Lampoon's Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women," a rousing 90- minute double feature of rude, crude and lewd that premieres at 8 p.m. Sunday on Showtime. Brown portrays Harding (called Tonya Hardly here) and Bobbitt (Lenora Babbitt for these purposes) in a pair of satires that prove as side-splitting as they are over-the-top. ... "Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women" is undeniably sophomoric stuff. Yet it's often so funny you have trouble catching your breath."
The review notes: "Under the umbrella title, "National Lampoon's Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women," Brown presents "Tonya: The Battle of Wounded Knee" and "He Never Gave Me Orgasm: The Lenora Babbitt Story." ... Her method is simple. Beginning with stories we all know, she takes each somewhere beyond the truth, twisting here, adding there, being careful to offend just about everybody at one time or another. And yes, both are very funny -- if you're not the sort to be easily outraged."
Undersourced. Tagged for notability for over a decade. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 16:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Yet one of many articles created in a spree by Rajeshbieee in violation of WP:NOTDATABASE. Although this film has a notable hero, I can't find third-party sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 10:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This is an unusual AFD discussion as the nomination has been withdrawn but there is more support for Deletion than Keeping the article. Please review recent improvements to the article that have occurred over the past two days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article about a short film. The attempted notability claim here is that it won an award at a minor film festival, but WP:NFILM does not just indiscriminately accept every single film festival award on earth as a notability-locking award -- that only goes to major internationally prominent film festivals such as Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto or Sundance whose awards get broadly reported by the media as news, because even the award itself has to meet the notability criteria for awards before it can make its winners notable for winning it. But the award claim here is unsourced, and the article isn't citing any other sources for anything else either. Bearcat ( talk) 20:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Deletion discussions relating to filmmakers, directors and other non-actor film-related people should no longer be listed on this page. Please list them at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers instead. |
Points of interest related to
Film on Wikipedia: History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Style – To-do |
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Film. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
Scan for Film AfDs |
The subject lacks substantial coverage in third-party reliable sources, and there is insufficient evidence to meet WP:NFILM. GSS 💬 15:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence that this is a notable film. Can be redirected to George Albert Smith (filmmaker)#Selected filmography. Fram ( talk) 07:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence that this 43-second film is notable, hasn't received significant attention. No good redirect target found. Fram ( talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No evidence of notability for this 2 minute film, just included in some websites but without significant attention (e.g. this or this). No obvious redirect target found, if there is one then redirecting is of course acceptable. Fram ( talk) 07:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
No indication that this is a notable film (well, a 31 second static shot). Apparently not only have we no idea who actually made it (just the producre), but we also don't know what is being shown according to this. Perhaps some list for this and many similar non-notable shorts may be feasible, but at the moment I don't see a good redirect target. Perhaps William Kennedy Dickson filmography, which gives an idea of the number of such ultrashort films that were made (and is clearly incomplete, as e.g. this very one isn't on that list). Fram ( talk) 07:42, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be an underinclusive and unnecessary duplication of Category:Cinemas and movie theaters by country, which includes many more theaters which are not on this list. I don't believe this page is particularly useful as a stand-alone list. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is a case of WP:NOTDIR. The most recent AfD closed as no consensus but several of the keep arguments were effectively arguing WP:USEFUL, which is not an appropriate deletion argument. Let'srun ( talk) 19:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
fails WP:NFILM. Theroadislong ( talk) 21:09, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Only sourced to the novel itself and the article is only plot with no real-world commentary, besides from its comparison to RMS Queen Mary. Neocorelight ( Talk) 09:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Before search revealed little results outside of sources already in article ( passing mention in variety), fr-wiki article has little else to offer too. Someone should search in dutch but subject might not have another name based off filmfonds.nl source in article. (pinging Mushy Yank de-prodded) Just i yaya 13:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
All in all (and maybe there's more), I'd rather keep this, but that's just me. There's no page about the artist so far. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
My PROD tag was removed, so here we are. This is an older duplicate of Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance. As this award was divided into two categories from 2014 to 2023, the article is also partly a duplicate of Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance, Male and Black Reel Award for Outstanding Breakthrough Performance, Female. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
The sources are all about Aranmanai 4, but make no mention of "Baakghost" or "Baak" (except in one source "Baak" is mentioned but it appears to be a character from Aranmanai 4." A hoax? Cleo Cooper ( talk) 06:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't think this meets WP:NFILM / WP:GNG. Kept at 2006 AfD, but standards were considerably lower then. Boleyn ( talk) 08:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Delete - Fails WP:NFILM. There's a paragraph in this The Weekly Standard article: [1], doesn't count as significant coverage. -- Mika1h ( talk) 14:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Found zero evidence of notability myself. Mushy Yank added a Variety article which mentions the film, but only very briefly, so I don't take it for much. And even then, if that's all there is then I don't see why this should've been dePRODded in the first place. QuietHere ( talk | contributions) 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 15:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 ( talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
a catalog of a particular company's productsand I have added more sources. Someonewhoisusinginternet ( talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Listicle with minimal coverage (and what it does get is from blog-type websites rather than any major news source). Violates MOS:FILMACCOLADES, specifically the sentence 'Awards bestowed by web-only entities are not generally included'. Survived an AfD in 2013 that was marred by WP:SPA activity. Sgubaldo ( talk) 16:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 23:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
The result was keep. ( non-admin closure) Geschichte ( talk) 14:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Nothing in the article or my BEFORE suggests this meets WP:GNG (or WP:NFILM). Nothing in GBooks or GScholar (well, one mention in a German book?). Maybe there is some coverage in National Lampoon (magazine) ( September/October 1994), but it is a parody magazine, so not sure if it is reliable, and even if there is something there, GNG requires multiple sources (so at least one more). Can anyone find anything to rescue this - or failing that, suggest a valid redirect target? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
*Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A review of newly found sources would be helpful. What would the redirect target article be?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
The review notes: "Julie Brown casts a long, amusing shadow in Showtime's head-strongly dumb "National Lam- poon's Attack of the 5'2" Women," an umbrella title for two films. The kicky pair of satires within spoof two of the media's recent bete noir bad girls, skater-agitator Tonya Harding and impromptu surgeon Lorena Bobbitt, whose fictional counterparts are both played by Brown. Yes, nothing is sacred and all bets are off as "Attack" goes on the offensive, seizing the public personas of Harding and Bobbitt to transmit a picture of cheesy, pulp aspirations, where fame and lame are interchangeable and mass communications is the twisted funnel through which rattles the news. ... Ah, but an instant before this, the missus learns that her recently repaired hubby has been cheating again. Ouch! Sophomoric and crude, and way too long, "Attack" manages to play as a fun-dumb damning of the media-rama."
The review notes: "In this daffy double-header, Julie Brown spoofs two of last year's tabloid inamoratas. First, in an utterly unruly farce, she plays Tonya Hardly. The chain-smoking, asthma-atomizer-sucking, overweight skater is consumed with jealously for her competitor Nancy Cardigan (Khrystyne Haje). ... While this pair of infamous headline-generators present perfect targets for Brown's raucous, ribald satire, the fact is that both episodes seem a little dated already. Nothing goes stale faster than a juicy tabloid scandal. Grade: B+"
The review notes: "In NATIONAL LAMPOON'S ATTACK OF THE 5'2" WOMEN (Showtime, Sunday, 8-9:30 p.m.), the very funny, very brazen star of Medusa: Dare to Be Truthful, the wicked 1991 parody of Madonna's Truth or Dare parody, sinks her fangs into two notorious women of recent headlines, figure skater Tonya Harding and spouse mutilator Lorena Bobbitt, and doesn't let go. As she did in Medusa, Brown ... sticks closely to the original text; in this case, her text is the chronology of Harding's bumbling plot to sideline her hated rival, Nancy Kerrigan, and Bobbitt's bumbling plan to sideline her hated husband, John Wayne Bobbitt. ... That Attack of the 5'2" Women flags is due to its length--90 minutes is a hell of a long way to go for two jokes--as well as to the datedness of its situations. There are no two recent, overreported media stories richer for comedy by and about women than those of Harding and Bobbitt, and, consequently, we've already seen and heard a heap. This quarry is too easy. In the name of comedy sisterhood, Julie Brown should lace up her bustier and work at a tougher assignment--say, whipping sketch comedy into shape. She TV: C+ At-tack of the 5'2" Women: B-. "
The review ntoes: "For, though everyone would recognize John Wayne Bobbitt (or Juan Wayne, as his wife calls him here) as the funnier figure from his subsequent deadpan attempts to cash in on his celebrity, Brown hogs the comedy in this half with her Venezuelan accent and a macha swagger that doesn’t quite square with anyone’s worst picture of the real Lorena. As a targetless spoof, it’s, well, satirically challenged."
The review notes: "Brown’s brilliant Madonna satire, “Medusa: Dare to Be Truthful,” and her campy novelty hit songs like “Homecoming Queen’s Got a Gun” point to her obvious skill. But “Attack of the 5’2″ Women” comes off no better than a latter-day National Lampoon, where the philosophy has descended to the point where anything is allowed, and it would be good if at least some of it were funny."
The review notes: "The humor in "Tonya: The Battle of Wounded Knee" and "He Never Give Me Orgasm: The Lenora Babbitt Story" is broad - Ms. Harding's behind, for instance, is the target of many a joke. And the panting media, perfect prey, escape virtually unscathed. Ms. Brown plays both women as conniving, clueless and exceedingly tacky. The adjectives "gross" and "cheap" also come to mind - for example, when, in trying to attract "Juan Wayne," Ms. Babbitt licks a jukebox. Meanwhile, "Tonya Hardly" cuts her pizza with her skates, while her ditzy competitor "Nancy Cardigan" endorses pork with the line, "It's really neat." Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women isn't."
The review notes: "This elevation of tackiness to an art form is what we get from Julie Brown in "National Lampoon's Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women," a rousing 90- minute double feature of rude, crude and lewd that premieres at 8 p.m. Sunday on Showtime. Brown portrays Harding (called Tonya Hardly here) and Bobbitt (Lenora Babbitt for these purposes) in a pair of satires that prove as side-splitting as they are over-the-top. ... "Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women" is undeniably sophomoric stuff. Yet it's often so funny you have trouble catching your breath."
The review notes: "Under the umbrella title, "National Lampoon's Attack of the 5 Ft. 2 Women," Brown presents "Tonya: The Battle of Wounded Knee" and "He Never Gave Me Orgasm: The Lenora Babbitt Story." ... Her method is simple. Beginning with stories we all know, she takes each somewhere beyond the truth, twisting here, adding there, being careful to offend just about everybody at one time or another. And yes, both are very funny -- if you're not the sort to be easily outraged."
Undersourced. Tagged for notability for over a decade. Kailash29792 (talk) 14:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
North America
1000 16:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Yet one of many articles created in a spree by Rajeshbieee in violation of WP:NOTDATABASE. Although this film has a notable hero, I can't find third-party sources. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
'''[[
User:CanonNi]]'''
(
talk|
contribs) 10:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. This is an unusual AFD discussion as the nomination has been withdrawn but there is more support for Deletion than Keeping the article. Please review recent improvements to the article that have occurred over the past two days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Completely unsourced article about a short film. The attempted notability claim here is that it won an award at a minor film festival, but WP:NFILM does not just indiscriminately accept every single film festival award on earth as a notability-locking award -- that only goes to major internationally prominent film festivals such as Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto or Sundance whose awards get broadly reported by the media as news, because even the award itself has to meet the notability criteria for awards before it can make its winners notable for winning it. But the award claim here is unsourced, and the article isn't citing any other sources for anything else either. Bearcat ( talk) 20:48, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 23:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)