Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Filmic Achievement


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Filmic Achievement

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 08:51, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:51, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amkgp  💬  06:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I found litte to suggest a pass of NFILM, results like this use 'Filmic Achievement' to mean a 'good film', not in reference to the movie. There's what looks like a good feature in Pittsburgh City Paper and a very short review in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, but I think it's not quite enough to push the film into notability as NFILM wants nationally known critics and full-length reviews and wide distribution (I doubt either article is by a nationally known person, and the Pittsburgh PG article isn't a full review, it's mostly plotting summary). A redirect to Authentic Films could also be considered. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 15:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No sign of notability, no claim of notability, barely even verifiable in 3rd-party sources.  --Lockley (talk) 21:35, 7 July 2020 (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.