Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese Boxes (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) Natg 19 (talk) 00:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Chinese Boxes (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Per WP:NFSOURCES, capsule reviews are “insufficient enough to fully establish notability.”  The Radio Times and Time Out are capsule reviews which are therefore insufficient. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. Found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and nothing suitable was found to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator (talk) 15:25, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Germany,  and United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's more of a weak keep, admittedly, but I managed to scrounge up some sourcing. It looks like there's probably more out there from 84 and 85, but isn't on the internet. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  18:13, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per the additions made above. Also here's a link to the full page feature in Sight and Sound mentioned in the article Piecesofuk (talk) 14:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I withdraw the nomination per article improvements. The Film Creator (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2022 (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.