This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
I redirected the page because another user has marked it as possibly not notable: coverage, I assume, being considered lacking the critical assessment (=no reviews) which would warrant a standalone page according to NFILM. Feel free to revert again if you think it's notable enough for a standalone page, and/or are willing to/can expand it with reviews (I could not find any in Spanish but I didn't search that hard, true). Coverage, on the other hand, allows verifiability and Chilean film being a rather limited industry, I thought redirecting there may be suitable. I personally would have kept the page as it was (and removed the tag) as meeting GNG, but I am quite certain that would be challenged, hence the Redirect as a "less bad" solution.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:14, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just came across an empty category that this article was in and was surprised to see it BLAR'd as it seems to have a decent amount of content. I was also surprised to see you BLAR as when I come across you in AFD, you are usually arguing to Keep articles. But you know the film sources better than I, especially international ones, so I trust your opinion. I don't see a PROD or AFD tag so I'm not sure what could be challenged except for this BLARring. But I appreciate the explanation. LizRead!Talk! 22:28, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and thank you. Sorry if my explanation was unclear: what I fear would be challenged is if I removed the notability tag and stated that the film deserves a standalone page as written. It's a 2021 film so maybe if the directors and actors become more notable themselves in the future, coverage will follow and we can go back to a full article (or another redirect target). We could revert the redirect now and leave the article with the tag on, sure, but with no other substantial sources added that would eventually lead to Afd and a probable waste of time (that's, at least, what I imagine). But if other users think the current coverage is enough, feel free to revert again, no problem for me. I realise I should have taken the time to explain all this before Redirecting, and especially to @Phantom Oficiall, but I thought the page history spoke for itself, which is seldom a good idea. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 23:13, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
