User talk:Lastpictures

Notability of Last pictures
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Last pictures, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Last pictures seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Last pictures, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC) Hi, you can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~

This was tagged by another editor as non-notable and a conflict of interest, given your username. I deleted the article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. The claim to notability was that it has had one film accepted for one festival, and that does not appear to meet Notability (films).

The "clients" section is meaningless and looks like spam - the links to the sites are not references. Similarly the "founders" section. It's worth saying who they are, but why have a separate section, other than for self-promotion, for people who are non-notable?

The only references are to your own websites. Have a look at the film notability criteria, and see in particular if you can meet any of these criteria Good luck jimfbleak (talk) 07:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics. (give references for these)
 * Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release.
 * The film was deemed notable by a broad survey of film critics, academics, or movie professionals, when such a poll was conducted at least five years after the film's release.
 * The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release.
 * The film was featured as part of a documentary, program, or retrospective on the history of cinema.
 * The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.
 * The film was selected for preservation in a national archive.
 * The film is "taught" as a subject at an accredited university or college with a notable film program.