Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Daylight

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The result was Withdrawn -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

American Daylight

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unnnotable film. Fails WP:NF and WP:N Prod removed by creator with statement that "it is notable" without providing any actual proof. Article is a one line stub that appears to have been created purely to justify the creator's creation of a template of the director. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 21:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. — -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 21:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep You did no research to prove that it is not notable--TheMovieBuff (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide proof that Collectonian did no research. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Disruptive nomination contrary to WP:BEFORE. Colonel Warden (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Variety review[1] Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NF - needs at least two FULL-length reviews, which that is not. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

False. That is not an absolute mandate. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep per diligent BEFORE showing article has easy WP:POTENTIAL for WP:IMPROVEment. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid speedy keep, as usual. Would it seriously kill you to just say keep instead of always claiming anything is speedy? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:54, 4 February 2010 (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.