Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great Directors (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 17:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Great Directors
AfDs for this article:
 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Tagged for notability since 2010. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Very Strong Keep. In-depth coverage in:
 * 1) The Denver Post https://www.denverpost.com/2010/07/21/movie-review-great-directors-provides-good-overview/
 * 2) ARTS ATL
 * 3) Time out
 * 4) The Culturist
 * 5) The Hollywood Reporter
 * 6) NPR
 * among other things....!!!!!! Also please seeInterview about the film in the NYT- My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  21:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Note to nominator, would you consider withdrawing this nomination? Thank you.- My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank)  21:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC) (also have a look at the first nomination, please)
 * Delete Interviewing famous people doesn't, alone, bring notability to the interviewer. The abovementioned sources are rather focusing on the "lineup" of the film than the film itself and the director. ǁ ǁǁ ǁ Chalk19 (talk) 01:14, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Interviewing famous people doesn't, alone, bring notability to the interviewer. No but 1) we are discussing a film not a person 2) various reviews in very reliable media (I did not wish to leave the link to The Culturist, which is not really great in any way, in the list but I left it by mistake and will leave it; there are other sources anyway but the list above is more than sufficient) do establish notability of a film. The abovementioned sources are rather focusing on the "lineup" of the film than the film itself and the director is absolutely not true ! They do focus on the film and its content. Because I am not going to quote them all verbatim to prove it, I'm inviting other users to read them and confirm these are reviews in reliable independent sources. This film is obviously very clearly notable and I still hope the user who initiated this discussion will withdraw this nomination. Notability had been established at the 1st Afd and, as obvious as this may seems, it's very easy to confirm that it's still clear, very very clear. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank)  02:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. There seem to be plenty of reviews in the usual places. I'm not really seeing a rationale to delete. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:44, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
 * No further comment
 * 1) NYT
 * 2) LAT
 * 3) Guardian
 * 4) DVD Talk....
 * - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  05:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep as per the full reviews of the film in very reliable sources such as The Guardian, The New York Times and LA Times as well as many other reviews linked above so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2023 (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.