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.
The result was Speedy keep, withdrawn by nominator, no outstanding delete votes --
GBfan 12:29, 31 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Released
to a maximum of five theatres, with a bare smattering of coverage, the notability of this film is, at the least, questionable. Completely unsourced. That said, it seems a fairly good, neutral description of the film, so if (note the "if") the notability is there - which would, of course, mean that good-quality, non-primary sources were found - then the article's issues should be fixable Adam Cuerden(
talk) 16:51, 27 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Release to theatres is not a measure of notability, only of distribution finances. I found many reviews and many mentions. I've added multiple significant references, including one critical of the film.
Thisisnotatest (
talk) 07:52, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Update: The
nominator conceded "if the notability is there - which would, of course, mean that good-quality, non-primary sources were found - then the article's issues should be fixable". Fine to state the obvious, but
WP:BEFORE encourages a truly diligent search before a nomination and discourages improvable topics being sent to AFD due to a
current state. Though it sometimes does, AFD is
not to be used as a bludgeon to force improvement... however, since I easily found
so many good sources available I was able to easily
perform improvements anyone could have
done over time and through regular editing to perhaps show the nominator the error in his evaluation. There is no valid reason for this to remain open, other than to embarrass someone else for their failure however well intended.
Thanks, Schmidt, Michael Q. 23:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)reply
WP:HEY anyone? Does someone feel empowered to close early under
WP:OUTCOMES?
THIS is the
improvable (but unsourced) topic that was brought to AFD. As truly
decent sources were plentiful and even though it was
not required, I took a few of the many and
addressed issues
thusly.... taking the 1927 characters (320 words) start-class-needing-work and turned it into a quite decent and well-sourced 6894 characters (1115 words) B-class article... a 3x expansion. It is exceedingly obvious that the topic meets
WP:NF in all ways and, specially after
improvemsnts, I am pretty certain that an early close will not be taken to
WP:DRV... which would simply be a public embarrassment. Schmidt, Michael Q. 20:26, 30 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
MichaelQSchmidt: Honestly, I think you've proven your case. Feel free to have this one closed. WithdrawnAdam Cuerden(
talk) 12:05, 31 December 2015 (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.