Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fourth Down and Love


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. There hasn't been partcipation in the last two weeks. (non-admin closure) Toadette Edit! 05:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Fourth Down and Love

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article about a television film, not properly referenced as passing either WP:NFILM or WP:TVSHOW. As always, television films are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to show evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them -- but this is referenced entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, with absolutely no evidence of third-party media coverage shown at all. Bearcat (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film, Television,  and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Added a presentation in Southern Living, and a review in Decider (see this).- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  11:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: The Southern Living article is "Checking out an exclusive clip". This is about the extent of all coverage I find, where to watch the thing. The TV Guide sourcing in the article is bare, so isn't a valid source. I don't mind any reviews other than what's given already, that's not enough. Oaktree b (talk) 20:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This, still doesn't add enough to the discussion to !keep. Oaktree b (talk) 20:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The review notes: "I’m happy to report that Fourth Down and Love offers no real surprises plot-wise and pretty much adheres to every trope you expect from both a Hallmark romance and a kid-centric sports movie. You bet Mike’s brother and sister-in-law try to set him up with Erin every chance they can get. You bet there’s a sweet and sassy grandma. There’s a fundraiser, a winning touchdown, hurt feelings and boosted morale, all that good stuff. I’m happy that Fourth Down and Love has all of that, because all of those plot points are fun to see and because it means I can focus this take on what the movie really excels at: character."   The review is listed on Rotten Tomatoes here. The review notes: "While we're unsure if this film was a one-off or part of a movie series, I'm crossing my fingers for more. I found the entire Hanson family to be charming, and I'd love to see Mike coach another season of the Whalers flag football team with assistance from Jimmy, Danielle, and Erin. Since this was the first adult male that gave Kiara any attention, I think we need more time to see how the family dynamics evolve now that Mike is her mom's boyfriend and her coach."   The article notes: "In Hallmark Channel's latest Fall into Love movie, a single mom runs into her old college sweetheart who is now a professional football player. ... Fourth Down and Love premieres on Saturday, Sept. 9 at 8 p.m. ET on Hallmark Channel."   The article notes: "Hallmark is giving all fans a big treat with their newest flick in their Fall into Love programing, Fourth Down and Love starring Pascale Hutton and Ryan Paevey. Paevey plays professional football star Mike Hansen who suffers an injury that sidelines him for a month. Mike’s brother Jimmy (Dan Payne, Outrunners) convinces Mike to come home while he’s recovering."  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Fourth Down and Love to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 11:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC) </ul> Relisting comment: An evaluation of newly found sources would be very helpful. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 22:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Still hoping for an assessment of newly found sources and whether or not they make a difference as the deletion rationale states the article is not properly referenced. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 22:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.