Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Good Luck (1996 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   keep. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 18:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Good Luck (1996 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NFILM: I cannot find reliable sources covering this film. Esquivalience t 01:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Go ahead. I'm dealing with enough Wiki-nonsense right now. There was nothing there, I put something there, if you don't like it, go back to nothing.Lynn Wysong (talk) 01:14, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 02:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 02:31, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep. Reviews in The New York Times, Los Angeles Times , People and Variety  are easily sufficient to establish notability for this film. These were readily found in a couple of minutes by a simple Google search using the names of the two stars and the film's title.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 05:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Further sources *easily* found from a Google search: Ability magazine, EW, Mademoiselle, and a few books:, , . --Michig (talk) 07:22, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep – Passes WP:NFSOURCES with ease. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 07:26, 9 March 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.