Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coven (short film)

Coven (short film)

Non-notable student film, prod removed without comment. Has won one, non-prestigious award. On the surface appears to have been edited by numerous people but almost every edit is by sock puppeteer Tweety21 (currently blocked) or one of her many anonIPs. Precious Roy 17:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

note: Please ignore the inflammatory comments by Gayunicorn. It's another of Tweety21's socks. I've moved them below the discussion so as to not distract from the matter at hand. Precious Roy 01:54, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong KeepWiccawikka 15:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC) I usually don't get involved in these kinds of forums, but I actually checked this movie out and read up the reviews in what appears to be credible sources. Comments by "gayunicorn", and "Precous Roy" aside I hope there really is not religious hate issues going on here, as this film does not appear to be promoting Wicca or anything else, but retelling a childrens story. (please no hate mail) I also noticed this film listed in Leelee Sobieskis' wiki entry as well.Wiccawikka 15:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable.--Gp75motorsports 18:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's got a little bit of media coverage, so I think it's worth keeping around. The threshold for notability for something like this is fairly low, in my opinion, and an independent review in a reasonably good media organ qualifies. I don't see any compelling reason to delete. Orpheus 23:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Numerous sources verify that it is a recipient of a notable award and that the film has merit; per WP:NF: "The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking." Furthermore, there is no established, official religion of the nation, whether it is Wicca or Christianity. The comments border on hypocrisy. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The award is not "major" it's from a small festival, and three other films won the same award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Precious Roy (talk • contribs)
Delete as nominated. I am confused, why is Tweety21's sock puppet arguing for deletion of an article they created? --Agamemnon2 06:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- She does a lot of things that don't make sense. My guess is she just wants to disrupt the process. Precious Roy 14:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive comments by Tweety21's sockpuppet

Delete Gayunicorn 23:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC) THIS APPEARS TO BE A GLORIFICATION OF WICCA!!!! Although I am not against various religions, Christianity is the main stream religion in North American!! Also upon watching the movie this is PAGONISTIC!!! please for the love of God delete this entry!!!Gayunicorn 23:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC) This template must be substituted.[reply]

Gayunicorn, your comments are offensive. I request that you redact them. Corvus cornix 23:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This comment isn't really valid: the neutral point of view policy demands that we not discriminate against "paganistic" religions or, equivalently, favour Christianity. I recommend it be disregarded. Nihiltres^(t.l) 01:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

commentGayunicorn 23:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)Re: comments put on my talk, I have absolutly no problems with other religions, whatever people do in the privacy of their own homes is their own busines, but we shouldnt be condoning it with movies. Should not have put up article in the first place.Gayunicorn 00:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The media should reflect mainstream and recognized religions, not fringe ones that are not organized or cults! also should not promote films with nudity. Gayunicorn 23:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]