Talk:Gone Missing (film)

Deletion
I added more sources in the article. I hope this is enough so that it is not deleted.Theys York (talk) 16:53, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * In my view, the sources you added don't show that Gone Missing is notable. Per the relevant guidelines (the general notability guideline and the notability guideline for film), this needs to have received significant attention in multiple reliable sources. The Interfilmes and Blu-Ray.com sources appear to be routine entries in online databases, so they don't count as significant coverage. The article by Afame is a corporate press releaase, not a reliable source, and it only mentions Gone Missing in passing. The Crushable piece is definitely significant coverage and appears to be reliable, but I don't think it's enough to carry the day.


 * That said, you are free to remove the PROD tag for any reason. See WP:DEPROD. If you do, I will probably take this to AFD, where other editors can weigh in on the available sources and the question of notability. Rebb  ing  17:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The film was reported by the Los Angeles Times along with several Relevant titles, more relevant it does not like. Theys York (talk) 19:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Do you have the URL of the Times piece? I couldn't locate it. Rebb  ing  19:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * He is quoted in the article in the "release" section and here.Theys York (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * My mistake: I didn't notice that. Unfortunately, that's appears to be a routine TV listing; it states in full: "Do you know where your children are? A mother's (Daphne Zuniga) teen daughter has 'Gone Missing' at spring break in this new made-for-cable thriller. 8 p.m. Lifetime." That's not significant coverage. Rebb  ing  19:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)