Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Nation Is Built


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) buidhe 23:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

A Nation Is Built

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Obscure (state-funded?) film is not notable per WP:NFILM. KidAd (talk) 23:58, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to Frank Hurley. This is kind of confusing, but according to this book: which devotes a sentence and an earlier passing mention to this film, not significant coverage, the film was made for the 150th anniversary of European settlement in New South Wales. I think it also says that Hurley made this film under sponsorship from the government, although that detail is ambiguously explained and I might be wrong there. Due to this, the government archives on this film are not independent sources, and cannot contribute to notability. However, it still definitely deserves a mention at the Hurley Page, which it does not currently have, and therefore a Merge is appropriate. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC) Changing my vote to Keep per Aoziwe's analysis. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a definite keep I suggest:
 * There are hundreds of independent reliable references here for 1938–1939.
 * It still gets mentioned by IRS in 1941–1942.
 * It is still in IRS publications in 1988.
 * Strong in-depth coverage for at least two years with lasting coverage fifty years later. Aoziwe (talk) 05:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:NFILM and WP:GNG, it is held in the collection of the National Film and Sound Archive (NFSA) (see here, curator notes here), the NFSA deemed it significant enough to release it on dvd, it was also released on VHS as part of "Reel Australia Study Package: National Fictions 2 ... of films based on Australian myths and legends." and covered in an associated book (this is details of the 1990ed. published with the VHS release), in addition to the SMH review listed in the article, here are some more: The Bulletin "Making "A Nation" Film", the Telegraph (Brisbane) - |||l-category=Article "Wintergarden's Choice Is Varied and Original", The Advertiser (Adelaide) - |||l-category=Article "Notable Australian Film: "A Nation Is Built" Previewed", the film's narrator received a favorable review in the Labor Daily'' |||l-category=Article here, the State Library of New South Wales holds a number of photographs from the film in its collection (like this). Coolabahapple (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, btw, i've just reread the crossed out "merge" recommendation that states "Hurley made this film under sponsorship from the government, although that detail is ambiguously explained and I might be wrong there. Due to this, the government archives on this film are not independent sources, and cannot contribute to notability", this is incorrect, Australia's collecting institutions (NGA, NLA, NFSA, NMA, NPG and so on), are independent statutary authorities, and their collecting policies are independent of Government, indeed, it would be a brave Government to attempt to direct any of them as to what is deemed significant for their collections. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the sources identified above that show significant coverage in multiple reliable sources so that the film can be seen to pass WP:GNG and deletion is therefore no longer necessary imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:48, 5 April 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.