Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Der Bunker (2015)


 * 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 speedy keep. per WP:HEY and NOT per. (non-admin closure) Primefac (talk) 09:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Der Bunker (2015)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Small film, a few decent reviews but nothing approaching notability. Awards are from minor film festivals. Primefac (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  01:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  01:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

*Delete - Nothing usable out of the few pages on GSearch, those links are limited to forums and the like. Fails WP:NFILM. lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast 01:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Changing to Keep per Tokyogirl79. lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  01:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. The film has received reviews in reliable sources and it's also received quite a bit of coverage in the German media. It's not the strongest reception I've seen, but it's enough to warrant it having an article. I've also moved the title to (2015 film) in keeping with naming conventions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually there are no other films by this name, so I'm moving this to just Der Bunker. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - Enough German coverage seems to exist, two English, credible reviews and further considering it's going to be distributed and screened in the US should make it at least a scrape by. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Tokyogirl79's sources. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per topic meeting WP:NF. Very poor WP:BEFORE accompanied with a nomination statement easily disproved. Heck, even when first nominated included sourcing showed a meeting inclusion criteria.  "A few decent reviews" is exactly what meets criteria. Sorry, but in acknowledging they existed just where was your head at? Go re-read WP:NF, please. And , thank you for your work improving an improvable topic.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:21, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Not sure what the purpose was in completely biting the head off of the nominator, who knew candor was such a sin. I feel he was very valid (even if mildly borderline) in his nomination before the contributions by . Just because you might disagree with his viewpoint, doesn't entitle you to a full on assault of his intelligence. Just where was his head at? Probably stuck in WP:NF, where a mild majority of people including myself before the tokyo contributions would have thought the article didn't pass. Sheesh. Sulfurboy (talk) 05:16, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - I linked it to the German-language article. Strong reviews from Der Spiegel and other RS. —Мандичка YO 😜 07:30, 8 July 2015 (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.