Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Going Down in LA-LA Land


 * 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   keep. &mdash;SW&mdash; gab 20:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Going Down in LA-LA Land

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Deprodded based on the claim of search results establishing notability, but only source that appears to go beyond a trivial or routine mention is an Atlanta-area LGBT magazine interviewing the director due to the film being at an Atlanta LGBT film festival. The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 05:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: While not offering an !vote (yet), I wish to correct an inadvertant mis-statement by the nominattor. The article was not deprodded for being notable, but was deproded because it was new work, had never been otherwise tagged for concerns for sourcing nor notability, sources were available for possible improvement, it could benefit from expansion and improvement, and had not been given time to be improved through regular editing. See talk page HERE.  I do not believe the project is served by being overly impatient with hew articles, nor is it served by not informing an author that his article was prodded when first doing so.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually I did inform the author of the article. Just because it is new does not mean it should be kept nor that there being the possibility for improvement means it should be kept. To your comment about deprodding, you said the film was notable, so if not the sources what is it that makes you claim notability?--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You mis-read the deprod. I stated that the new stub article was improvable (expansion, sourcing, verifibility), and offered for consideration that we do not delete notable topics. However, and to disagree with your misinterpretation, I did not specifically state that this one was notable.  I deproded to allow time for its notability (or lack) to be established (or not) through regular editing. A prodders's demand for immediate improvement of possibly improvable topics always makes makes improvement through regular editing a bit difficult.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I found a review in Variety which I've added to the article. I'm having a difficult time finding additional coverage in reliable sources, although there is certainly no shortage of notices related to the film running in various festivals, as well as a decent amount of blogosphere coverage. This is pretty borderline. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  15:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I really can't find anything reliable and significant beyond the Variety source, and even the Variety source is ~75% plot summary rehash and 25% review/editorial. There's enough of what looks like unreliable chatter out there to suggest, to me, some borderline case to be made for notability, but in my opinion this falls short. I'll happily change my vote if someone else can provide better evidence of coverage that is both reliable and significant in scope. I'm finding lots of one or the other, nothing that is both. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  18:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Good deal of coverage in secondary sources see this search for just one example. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * With the exception of the Fenuxe source, those all appear to be trivial mentions to me (indeed, all but one are literally mentions). I suppose the existence of the Fenuxe piece in addition to the Variety source might push this to the other side of borderline, for me, although TDA's concerns about the scope of that source in his nomination are pretty well-taken. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  19:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment We do have additional more-then-trivial coverage in other sources, and as the film has screned in non-US locations, we might expand our searches to include non-English sources. And rather than outright deletion we might at a minimum consider  incubating it for a short time per WP:ATD. While the film did in fact screen at the Miami Gay & Lesbian Film Festival in May 2011, Frameline in June 2011, Outfest Film Festival in July 2011, the Iris Prize Festival and Tokoyo International Lesbian & Gay Film Festival in October 2011, the Toulouse Des Images Aux Mots Gay Film Festival in France in February 2012, the article tells us "It will be released in New York City on April 20, 2012."  With its ongoing festivals tour and a theatrical release in a major metropolitan area, we can await the expected coverage and the article's content can then benefit from cooperative attention out of mainspace.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources might seem a bit thin at current, but there is every prospect this will improve in the near future based on the well known actors in it (such as Bruce Vilanch) and the notability of the director (Casper Andreas), on this basis there is a good case to meet Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films criteria. If the cast were a bunch of unknowns I might propose Userfication but it seems excessive here. --Fæ (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It is actually not a "future release" as it has already been out in other areas. That is just referring to a showing in New York City.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 15:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep for now. A film which has visited festivals and is slated for imminent thetatrical release in New York City. Revisit the topic in May.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:57, 3 April 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.