Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crashcourse On The State Of Being (2012)


 * 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   delete.  MBisanz  talk 20:41, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Crashcourse On The State Of Being (2012)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFILM. The apparent claim to notability is that it got a "Silver Screen" award at the Nevada Film Festival... however, this does not appear to qualify as a "major award". As best as I can tell from the festival's website, they have three levels of award (Platinum, Golden, and Silver), with 10 feature films awarded each level... if so, this means that this wasn't even in the top 20 feature films at this festival, which ain't exactly Sundance in terms of significance. Nat Gertler (talk) 19:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The claim that the Nevada Film Festival is not 'established enough' because it only has 3 levels of awards, and the further assertion that because 'Crashcourse: On The State Of Being' itself (apparently in consequence of previous statement) didn't make the top 20 but the top 30 instead not only doesn't follow, as an argument, but seems to forget the very subjectivity of the term 'notable'.
 * The 'fact' of being noted would imply that the film is available and has been recognised, be it only by a couple of hundred people. If a body of people who profess to be in an industry (ie film or film festival), and decide together that something is notable are to be deemed irrelevant, I might ask those editors who have put this page up for deletion, I wonder how that given body were so easily able to simply throw away (or find in the first place) $16,000 for the top prize?
 * The Nevada Film Festival is not Sundance, which was an insightful point. Indeed, it appears that the Nevada Film Festival, is the film festival for Nevada state in the US. I might add that although it is not one of the big 10 international festivals, that the IMDB have a very strict 'notable' policy which only allow films that have been selected into one of their 500 'recognised' film festivals to have a page on their website. Not that I wish to overestimate the fact that the IMDB might have a very good understanding of notability in the film world, but I would have thought that that is evidence enough that 'Crashcourse: On The State Of Being' is not merely an amateur production that has got knowhere, and was shown at a private screening only!
 * Merlinmerton (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)]]
 * I'm not sure who you're quoting when you quote "established enough", but the point is not that having three levels of award means that the NFF is not established. The point is that having three levels of awards, each of which has ten winners in the category, makes it hard to consider ending up in the third category as "major". If you have any sources that suggest that the Silver Screen award means anything more than being in a ten-way tie for 21st place, please put it forth. That is separate from the question of whether the NFF is itself a significant festival... although that would seem to be a very real question to consider.
 * Our guideline for notability for films make it quite clear that inclusion in IMDb does not connote sufficient notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all, the last of MerlinMerton's points above re:IMBD is incorrect (ex. an IMDB page exists for To Boldly Flee, which has not been screened at any film festival ever). Secondarily; I will not claim to be an expert or even somewhat knowledged on the notability of various film festivals, there does not seem to be much or any retrievable coverage of this film external to the Nevada Film Festival.  This is problematic in terms of notability.  I therefore believe that the article should probably be Deleted, but I have only a moderate (40 - 60%) confidence level in that belief.  Regards, Jeremy  -- =) khfan93 (t) (c) 19:53, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I think the point of the silver award is to establish that 'Crashcourse' has been recognised out of a larger pool of entrants. Thirty awards means top thirty out of how ever many entrants put their film forward. For example (admittedly on a larger scale), the Sundance have forteen major awards for the 'feature films' section. At the 2011 festival, they reportedly got 10,000 entrants of which only just over 100 were nominated. Other than the overall winner, the nominees are not put in order of preference (1,2,3). Films are either nominated or the overall winner for each category. So whether 'Crashcourse' came 21st or 30th is irrelevant. Smaller film festivals tend to have more nominations to make up for having less categories.

With regards Jeremy's point about the film festival coverage, I literally just typed in nevada film fest into google and came up with these on the first page from yahoo to timesofindia: http://movies.yahoo.com/news/2011-nevada-film-festival-feature-films-events-overview-174500562.html http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/regional/telugu/news-interviews/International-honour-for-Hyderabadi-filmmaker/articleshow/17033989.cms http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/03/1167000/-Nevada-Film-Festival-selects-Over-Troubled-Waters-as-best-documentary-short http://catchingonmovie.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/winner-best-short-at-the-2009-nevada-film-festival/

I can link some more if these don't seem enough! Regards, 207.10.141.17 (talk) 04:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)]]
 * Our guidelines on awards granting notability to a film is that it must be a "major award". No matter how you slice it, 21st place in a relatively minor festival is hard to frame as a major award. And Jeremy was not saying that the festival gets no coverage; he said that he finds no coverage of the film outside of coverage of the festival. --Nat Gertler (talk) 05:29, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I can see exactly where you're coming from, and I suppose you're arguing against the subjectivity as a 'major award'. The key point you made about the festival being 'relatively minor' is interesting, because it is precisely that: minor, but relatively only. It is not, I would argue, altogether to be considered as minor as it does have coverage and it's awards can hardly be described as meagre ($16,000). Admittedly there are probably festivals that do give out larger prizes, though not 'relatively' more: Sundance, as we have been using that a lot as our example, gives out prizes of $25,000. Now, of course you may argue that the amount money doesn't substantiate claims to be 'major', however it cannot be discounted when the amount of prize money will be one of the key incentives towards whether a filmmaker will bother paying the initial entry fee to enter a festival. http://mancunion.com/2012/09/18/a-crashcourse-in-film-making/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_As_I_Know_it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.10.141.17 (talk) 15:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Even if the amount of the award were relevant (and it's not, otherwise my first-one-to-bring-me-a-cookie-gets-a-nickel award for my kids the other day would be of more import than an Oscar), the award in question, the Silver Screen, was not a $16000 award. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I suppose relative to the worth of each trophy given by the Oscars, your one nickel award to your children is not ungenerous, given perhaps the locality of the 'first-one-to-bring-me-a-cookie-gets-a-nickel' award. Admittedly I haven't heard of it either...obviously not enough coverage on your behalf. Let's assume that it did get recognition as an award, and your Child A won it, then the very fact of Child A receiving that award would implicate his/her being deserving of a nickel, and by extension your pat on his/her head is saying 'well done, here's a badge of recognition so other people recognise your talent, even though I know you aren't known as a good cookie-runner in the cookie-running business'. In similar terms, the Nevada Film Festival is recognised (now that we've established that), so by extension, so should all associates. 160.39.199.38 (talk) 19:51, 6 December 2012 (UTC)]]
 * Ummm, no, actually, there is a strong Wikipedia standard that notability is not inherited. If you wish to change guidelines such as the ones we have for notabiity of films, then you should engage in discussions at the guideline pages. To engage in deletion discussions, you should really be addressing things in terms of the existing guidelines. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Does it not actually say notability IS inherited, rather than what Nat has set it as? In fact, I am not necessarily denying that you could be right, however, that three of the notability guidelines, for books, films and music, do allow for inherited notability in certain circumstances. Merlinmerton (talk) 12:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)]]
 * Yes, it does say "Notability is inherited"... as a header on the page "Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions". Does this film hit the certain circumstances? No. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:28, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Well no, I don't suppose the film was trying to harm anyone or thing in particular, even dear old circumstance. Merlinmerton (talk) 18:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC) ]]
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete for now as currently failing the inclusion criteria set at WP:NF. We might consider incubation for a while, as the film is still touring and coverage may be forthcoming. Sad truth is that, even if not impossible, low budget independent films have a difficult time establishing notability.  I might have suggested the article be userfied to its creator, but I have concerns toward its author User talk:Merlinmerton possibly being the sdame person as film director Merlin Merton and the resulting problem then with WP:COI. To Merlinmerton, I would advise you study just what conflict of interest means to Wikipedia and how as a project, Wikipedia strongly discourages editors writing about topics with which they have a vested interest. If and or when the film receives coverage, analysis, and commentary from independent reliable sources, someone else might very well write an article about it. We need not digress into a discussion on the possible notability of the Nevada Film Festival for, even in acknowledging that the film received that festival award, that award win did not result coverage. If/when that changes we could consider a WP:REFUND of the article. And Merlin, while we do appreciate your generous contribution, I would like you to broaden your understanding of how Wikipedia determines notability. Please visit WP:PRIMER... and to understand what makes a source "reliable" enough for us, please visit WP:Identifying reliable sources.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Either delete due to the fact that the film has not yet established notability under WP:MOVIE, or as a second choice userfy if the film may become notable in the future and anyone wants the draft in their userspace. Nat and Michael have explained the issues here above. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete or Incubate per lack of significant coverage. However, as mentioned above, shows some promise. CinephileMatt (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2012 (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.