Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Mayor (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   no consensus. It looks as though this film could be notable, but the article currently needs a good deal of work to establish this. Right now, there aren't enough strong arguments one way or another to close this with a certain result, so no consensus, defaulting to keep. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 19:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

American Mayor (film)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article had a previous AFD under a different name (here), which resulted in delete. Someone recreated the article, but added a ref . All the ref says is that the movie does exist, but fails to establish any notability. flaminglawyer 21:22, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. The source doesn't say enough about the movie. There's no IMDb listing, and the only instance of an official website I can find is marked by Firefox as an attack site. Still, a general lack of reliable sources makes this article non-notable. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —PC78 (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and tag for expansion. Lack of an IMDB listing means little as they are not the "keepers of all film"... just a starting point toward WP:NFF... which this now seems to tickle as I have added a second citation.... and I never even heard of this film before. All depends on how deep one searches, I suppose.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Michael. I find it curious that when editors add IMDb as a reason to keep, editors who support deletion state IMDb does not show notability. Now this has been reversed, since it is not on IMDb, it is not notable. Which is it? Ikip (talk) 20:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not curious at all. IMDB isn't a reliable source because it's anonymously written and hardly verified, but it's so incredibly broad and indiscriminate in its inclusion that something has to be pretty danged obscure to not be included. It's like the Google test when applied to recent pop culture or computer-related topics; there are lots of things which don't merit an article which have Google counts that need to be expressed in scientific notation, but if Google hasn't heard of it, it may be a hoax/minor project/self-promotion. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 01:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Luckily, Google has heard of it.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm wait-and-see on this topic anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 01:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Or to put it another way, an IMDB listing is necessary but not sufficient. Stifle (talk) 10:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and update when film released. EagleFan (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Only two meager sources for a not yet released student film (WP:CRYSTAL anyone?) based on a guy who got 200 votes, running for mayor. --Sloane (talk) 17:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Not to steal your thunder, but it is not WP:Crystal nor a student film, as Travis Irvine is a graduate of University of Ohio, no longer a student, annouced his intention to document his mayoral campaign when he announced his candidacy, has made the film, it is now in post production, and is already slated for a release in a couple months by Troma Entertainment. Crystal? Nah. And though not (yet) added, there are a number of articles that speak toward the filmmaker, his films, and this film in particular, and the film . And a film based upon a the campaign of a guy who got only 200 votes? So what? If it meets WP:NFF, it meets WP:NFF., et al.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The articles cited generally seem to cover the guy's previous movie and his run for mayor, not this future film. They also seem to be primarily local coverage. I've seen much much worse cases for inclusion, but I still think this one falls short. If it manages to receive additional coverage in the future, the article can always be recreated.--Sloane (talk) 17:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - it doesn't matter if it doesn't have an imdb entry or is a student film. What establishes notability is reliable sources writing about it which provides objective evidence that the film has been noted.  This one just squeaks by. -- Whpq (talk) 17:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. A film documenting someone whose article is redlinked is rather unlikely to pass muster. Stifle (talk) 10:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Redlinks could be removed, but I rather thought they were intended that act toward encouraging new articles.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 19:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: unreleased film on a non-notable individual. JamesBurns (talk) 06:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Non-notable individual? Sorry. Cursory search find multiple sources toward individual's notability and his filmwork:
 * - Irvine announces candidacy, Raised in Bexley, Bexley high school, graduate of Ohio University, Owns Overbites Pictures to specialize in low-budget films, Documentary plans of campaign, campaign slogan
 * , Travis M. Irvine, 24; filmmaker; bachelor’s degree in communication studies, Ohio University.
 * - Bexley resident, took out mayoral petition
 * - addressed seniors, advocated using school facilities in creating a viable seniors center
 * - Irvine appeal for younger voters to become involved in city government, pledged to return $30,000 of the mayor's $90,000 salary if elected, wants to see businesses other than banks locate on Main Street - particularly ones that appeal to young people and families.
 * - lost election, receiving 4.62 percent of 3,300 votes (nice try though)
 * - race included 24-year-old filmmaker Irvine


 * - Earlier film "Coons" made when Irvine a 22-year-old senior at OU, Bexley High graduate, city premiere at Drexel Gateway theatre in Columbus sponsored by Drexel Theaters Group abd annual Columbus International Film and Video Festival and then at 2006 TromaDance Film Festival in Salt Lake City, film shot in August 2006 in Columbus and Athens as musical comedy horror satire made for $5000, Irvine working as film intern in New York, film was inspired by a 2004 Florida camping trip
 * - Times overview of earlier film
 * - "Coons" cast crew production, festival premiere at 2006 TromaDance Film Festival, picked up for distribution by Troma Studios, great in-depth review of film and filmmaker
 * - Ohio UNiversity premiere of earlier film, list film background w/producers, reasonable review of film amd filmmaker
 * - background of creation of low-budget Coons, excellent review of film and filmmaker
 * - excellent in-depth review of film and filmmaker, Troma acquiring film in 2006, Irvine talks of his film influences, scriptwriting in London after 2004 camping trip, backgound in how the created the coons, Overbites Pictures happy working with Troma, American Mayor in post-production, speaks toward funding
 * - Speaks of Irvine having left Bexley for New York and the returned for Coons screening, mention of campaign documentary wrapping up, distribution of coons, creation of Overbites, Scianamblo co-producer of AM and about-to-graduate OH, Irvine hopes coons screening will help funding for AM, this is after Mayor eace over.
 * Non-notable individual? Sorry. He's not Spielburg or Lucas... but he passes.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Only one of these is about Irvine himself, and it isn't even very long. All the others are general election articles or articles about the other movie Irvine made (almost all from student newspapers). So yes, non-notable individual.--Sloane (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Ikip. RP459 (talk) 19:45, 26 February 2009 (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.