Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Corruption (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 keep. (non-admin closure) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:05, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Anti-Corruption (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No reviews found during a search, just the usual film database sites. Tagged for notability since July 2017. Seems to fail WP:NFILM. Donaldd23 (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The film is discussed on pages 357–362 in a chapter titled 《廉政風暴》 ("Anti-Corruption").  The book notes on page 372: "由於《廉政風暴》的成功,帶動香港拍攝警匪片的風潮. 迄今警匪片仍是香港片產量最多的片種. 吳思遠功不可沒. 最難得的是，《廉政風暴》引起學者柏楊1979年10 月12 日在《中國時報》寫了近四千字的評論，內容包括分析影片的感想啟事，在臺灣送檢被禁的官場現形記. 這裡摘錄一段如下: 鳴呼,一個以肅貪為主題,顯示貪官難逃法網的電影,竟被咬定「缺乏社會教育 ". From Google Translate: "Due to the success of Anti-Corruption, the Hong Kong filming of police and criminal films has been popular. To date, police and criminal films are still the most produced film in Hong Kong. Wu Siyuan contributed a lot. The most rare thing is that Anti-Corruption caused scholar Bo Yang to write a nearly 4,000-character commentary in the China Times on October 12, 1979. The content included an analysis of the film’s thoughts, and the banned officialdom in Taiwan for prosecution. Remember. Here is an excerpt as follows: Ming Hu, a film with the theme of eliminating corruption, showing that corrupt officials can hardly escape the law, was criticized as "lack of social education ...""  This is a detailed film review of S Storm that briefly discusses Anti-Corruption. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Anti-Corruption to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 02:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I added these sources to the article. Cunard (talk) 05:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Note to closer for soft deletion:? This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Logs:

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 16:12, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified above that include reviews and a five page book chapter, that have been added to the article as additional references so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:36, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.