Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circuit (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) Icewedge (talk) 01:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Circuit (film)

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

No evidence this meets WP:NF, specifically the awards and nominations are not close to meeting #3 "The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking" and the reviews are merely blog entries. In addition, the article is little more than a plot summary. Ros0709 (talk) 21:32, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - film clearly passes WP:N with reviews in the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, Variety and others. Substantive coverage, including production information, in this book. That the article is in poor shape is a reason to improve it, not delete it. Otto4711 (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not meeting #3 of the 5 criteria at WP:NF does not mean deletion is required. Meeting any single one of those 5 criteria is sufficient for surpassing the notability hurdle. --RayBirks (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That was highlighted because the article does claim awards - my point was they are not sufficient. None of the other points needed "pre-empting" in this way. Ros0709 (talk) 23:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reviews in notable publications is enough for notability, (the links should be added to the article if they aren't already), even before taking into consideration notable production personnel and cast (very few redlinks to be seen). If the article makes a claim re: awards, etc. that is incorrect or misleading, that's a content issue, not something for AFD. Awards are not the only criteria for film-related articles on WIkipedia otherwise 99.99% of the film articles would have to be deleted. 23skidoo (talk) 02:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Question - given the improvements to the article since this AFD was opened and given that it appears to be WP:SNOWing a bit, can this be closed? Otto4711 (talk) 20:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Given the addition of major reviews to establish notability and content to the article, I have no objection to this being closed as keep. Ros0709 (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Reliable and verifiable source establish the claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 14:17, 11 December 2008 (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.