Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Wreck in a Gale: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Dclemens1971 (talk | contribs) |
Mushy Yank (talk | contribs) m ce |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* '''Keep''': Meets [[WP:NFILM]] as I mentioned in my edit summary when I "PROD-conned" it. See the guideline. Shown at festival more than 5 years after production. -[[User talk:Mushy Yank|<span style="font-family:American Typewriter;color:#F0000C">My, oh my! </span>]][[User:Mushy Yank|<span style="color:#A69A69;font-family:American Typewriter;font-size:13px;">(Mushy Yank)</span>]] 12:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC) <!--VCB Mushy Yank--> |
* '''Keep''': Meets [[WP:NFILM]] as I mentioned in my edit summary when I "PROD-conned" it. See the guideline. Shown at festival more than 5 years after production. -[[User talk:Mushy Yank|<span style="font-family:American Typewriter;color:#F0000C">My, oh my! </span>]][[User:Mushy Yank|<span style="color:#A69A69;font-family:American Typewriter;font-size:13px;">(Mushy Yank)</span>]] 12:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC) <!--VCB Mushy Yank--> |
||
**That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets [[WP:GNG]]. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
**That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets [[WP:GNG]]. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
**:Thank you for sharing your opinion. I'll stand by my Keep, if you allow me, as I find this short clearly does meet the inclusionary criteria (not only a "line"), which is quite clear. It also proves, btw, that this short has received the "significant attention" you mentioned in your rationale. What you call a "niche festival" has indeed been a very important film event for almost 40 years. You are free to call this |
**:Thank you for sharing your opinion. I'll stand by my Keep, if you allow me, as I find this short clearly does meet the inclusionary criteria (not only a "line"), which is quite clear. It also proves, btw, that this short has received the "significant attention" you mentioned in your rationale. What you call a "niche festival" has indeed been a very important film event for almost 40 years. You are free to call this "a curio of passing interest" but the film [https://site.unibo.it/istitutoconfucio/it/agenda/il-cinema-ritrovato-anno-zero/il-cinema-ritrovato-2020-programma-completo.pdf/@@download/file/Il%20Cinema%20Ritrovato%202020%20-%20programma%20completo.pdf has been screened] at a very notable festival (much) more than 5 years after its production and that is, I'm afraid, a fact. -[[User talk:Mushy Yank|<span style="font-family:American Typewriter;color:#F0000C">My, oh my! </span>]][[User:Mushy Yank|<span style="color:#A69A69;font-family:American Typewriter;font-size:13px;">(Mushy Yank)</span>]] 13:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete.''' N:FILM says "meeting these criteria is not an absolute guarantee that Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article entirely dedicated to the film," and that is true here, where there are no reliable sources to describe the notability of this film beyond its mere existence. [[User:Dclemens1971|Dclemens1971]] ([[User talk:Dclemens1971|talk]]) 13:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
*'''Delete.''' N:FILM says "meeting these criteria is not an absolute guarantee that Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article entirely dedicated to the film," and that is true here, where there are no reliable sources to describe the notability of this film beyond its mere existence. [[User:Dclemens1971|Dclemens1971]] ([[User talk:Dclemens1971|talk]]) 13:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 22:34, 29 April 2024
A Wreck in a Gale
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- A Wreck in a Gale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
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)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United Kingdom. Fram (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Meets WP:NFILM as I mentioned in my edit summary when I "PROD-conned" it. See the guideline. Shown at festival more than 5 years after production. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets WP:GNG. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. Fram (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing your opinion. I'll stand by my Keep, if you allow me, as I find this short clearly does meet the inclusionary criteria (not only a "line"), which is quite clear. It also proves, btw, that this short has received the "significant attention" you mentioned in your rationale. What you call a "niche festival" has indeed been a very important film event for almost 40 years. You are free to call this "a curio of passing interest" but the film has been screened at a very notable festival (much) more than 5 years after its production and that is, I'm afraid, a fact. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- That line in NFILM gives only a presumption which needs to be supported by reliable sources indicating that it meets WP:GNG. A screening on a niche festival which shows more than 500 such rediscoveries each year is hardly a clear indication of importance, more of being a curio of passing interest. Fram (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. N:FILM says "meeting these criteria is not an absolute guarantee that Wikipedia should have a separate, stand-alone article entirely dedicated to the film," and that is true here, where there are no reliable sources to describe the notability of this film beyond its mere existence. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)