Talk:The Forgotten Mountain: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Rheadaniella (talk | contribs) m Question |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
{{ping|Eagleash}} |
{{ping|Eagleash}} |
||
I see that you undo my versions, I added new reference and it does comply with [[:WP:NFILM]], 2 International Film Festivals, reliable newspaper article about the premiere, film review from the film festival, article about the film and not just interview. Just give me a strong reason why it doesn't meet [[:WP:NFILM]] otherwise there is no point to keep adding notability tag. [[ |
I see that you undo my versions, I added new reference and it does comply with [[:WP:NFILM]], 2 International Film Festivals, reliable newspaper article about the premiere, film review from the film festival, article about the film and not just interview. Just give me a strong reason why it doesn't meet [[:WP:NFILM]] otherwise there is no point to keep adding notability tag. [[User:Rheadaniella|Rheadaniella]] ([[User talk:Rheadaniella|talk]]) 11:18, 8 September 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:18, 8 September 2019
Film Stub‑class | |||||||
|
Notability Issue
@Eagleash and Martin Urbanec: Why do you think there is notability issue with this article? (Rheadaniella (talk) 17:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC))
- @Rheadanielle and Martin Urbanec: As advised at your talk page, the article needs sources that demonstrate it can comply with WP:NFILM and in particular with WP:NFO. Please read those pages. The fact that a film 'exists' does not mean it is worthy of an entry in the encyclopedia, even if it has received a showing at a 'local' festival. Please also see the general notability guidelines. The references are not in English; this makes it less easy to assess them and please also see WP:LANGCITE.
- Further, a page for this film has previously been deleted (according to the page curation tool) but I have not yet been able to locate it in the deletion log and am not certain what the reason may have been.
- Were it not for the festival showing, the page might have been tagged for deletion and it could yet be as it is still unreviewed. A future reviewer may have a different opinion (either way) but in my view the page should not have moved to mainspace without completing the WP:AfC process. Eagleash (talk) 10:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- I just undoed a revision that claims "new references added", while it only removes notability and stub templates. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@Eagleash: In my opinion, the film complies with WP:NFILM and it was in competition at the festival and it's not a "local" film festival but international. You can research the festival for more information. I just added a new reference in English from another film festival and I think there is enough evidence from reliable sources. It would be great if you can double check and thanks for replying back.Rheadaniella (talk) 08:46, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Rheadaniella: I am still of the opinion that it does not pass WP:NFILM. There is not much in the way of SIGCOV in the sources... they seem to be mainly reporrts of the film's existence or release; there are no reviews linked to or details of its 'reception'. It was only the mention of the festival (although not one of the major events) that meant I did not propose it via one of the deletion processes. However, the page is unreviewed and another patroller could pass it.
- NB a 'ping' will not work if it, the message and the signature are not all added in one edit. Eagleash (talk) 19:46, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
@Eagleash: I see that you undo my versions, I added new reference and it does comply with WP:NFILM, 2 International Film Festivals, reliable newspaper article about the premiere, film review from the film festival, article about the film and not just interview. Just give me a strong reason why it doesn't meet WP:NFILM otherwise there is no point to keep adding notability tag. Rheadaniella (talk) 11:18, 8 September 2019 (UTC)