Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crowhurst (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 no consensus that the sources provided lift the article above the WP:GNG standard. ansh 666 09:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Crowhurst (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFILM. Not yet released. The article was recreated after an expired prod. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 19:24, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 20:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.   C Thomas3   (talk) 20:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Film premiered at the 2017 Oldenburg Film Festival, a notable release. BOVINEBOY 2008 17:45, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. I accept that the film has a few reviews however it doesn't pass GNG. I checked metacritic film and it hasn't been reviewed at all by established critics. It is essentially an anonymous film because it is too small time. Szzuk (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ? Please explain what that means. Sam Sailor 04:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist un Eins uno 01:11, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. HINDWIKI •  CHAT  02:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * How? (WP:VAGUEWAVE) — Sam Sailor 04:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: it's not clear whether the film is still awaiting general release (in which case it would fail WP:NFF) or was only intended to have a limited release (in which case it would fail WP:NFO). Either way, it doesn't currently meet GNG. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 12:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep has reliable sources reviews from The Hollywood Reporter and Screen International already referenced in the article, passes WP:GNG Atlantic306 (talk) 17:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have significant coverage in six reliable, independent sources, the film passes GNG. NFF does not come into play here. Sam Sailor 04:57, 11 December 2017 (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.