Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City of God – 10 Years Later


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:08, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

City of God – 10 Years Later

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable documentary; damiens.rf 17:09, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Are you serious? Even with no determination any one could find out that it's notable. In the Portuguese Wikipedia, there is two sources from G1 and Zero Hora. But if you aren't satisfied with Portuguese sources (even if WP:GNG says "any language"), the basic Google search indicates sources from BBC, Miami New Times and Hollywood Reporter. Only to indicate a few... Gabriel Yuji (talk) 18:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Appears to satisfy WP:NF per Gabriel Yuji. A further Google search outputs Highsnobiety and Variety. According to the Miami Herald, this film is also internationally premiering at the Miami International Film Festival. Mz7 (talk) 18:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep per the raft of sources found above.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 20:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yeah, we've got enough sources to prove notability now. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - the sources provided above substantiate notability without too much trouble. Stalwart 111  22:48, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per its recent edits, which left it in harmony with our notability guidelines. Victão Lopes  Fala! 23:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Original Portuguese:


 * I've found some reviews, so I'm going to snow close this because those along with the current sourcing on the article shows that this passes film guidelines and there's no reason to drag this out for a full week.
 * 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.