Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/8:46 (film)


 * 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 delete. Spartaz Humbug! 07:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

8:46 (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This stub was boldly coverted to a redirect by, who cited "non-notable film that fails WP:NFILM". However, there was no mention of this film or related term at the target. I opened an RfD, where the suggestion was to AfD this instead, as there was concern that the page history might have notable contents. —Bagumba (talk) 07:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note to closer Consider my nomination procedural (given the unique circumstances), and not an endorsement to delete.—Bagumba (talk) 13:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, or redirect and add a mention of the film to the target, clearly does not meet the criteria for its own article per WP:NFILM. QuestFour (talk) 11:07, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Bagumba (talk) 07:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Two of the sources cited are IMDb, which is not an acceptable source due to being WP:USERGENERATED. The Encyclopedia Britannica, History.com and Virgil Films sources don't mention the film at all, and the Kickstarter source is unacceptable because it's WP:SELFPUBLISHED. The film doesn't seem to have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, so it fails WP:GNG. Not a very active user (talk) 11:18, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak delete (or redirect if there's a mention anywhere) doesn't seem to have film reviews or other coverage to pass WP:NFILM (searching complicated only slightly by the fact that there are a lot of films on 9/11).There's some coverage in Variety and a short review in Library Journal but there doesn't seem to be any further coverage Eddie891 Talk Work 13:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I understand that this page doesn't have a lot of sources, however I must point out that the discussion of the redirect for this page resulted in it being restored. Are we sure to delete the article after such a recent change by other people? Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * As the RfD nominator, I WP:SNOW/WP:IAR closed it, as the input was that an AfD was more appropriate to judge the content in the page's history. Do not consider the RfD close to be a "true" restore, nor this AfD to be a recommendation to delete. This merely seems like the best venue for a rather unique case.—Bagumba (talk) 11:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.