Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In Search of the Ultra-Sex


 * 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)  Ya  sh  !   10:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

In Search of the Ultra-Sex

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Purely promotional piece for an otherwise non-notable film outside of France. Article contributors, and  are single-purpose accounts dedicated to this movie and its authors. Suggest blocking or at least warning them. — JFG talk 08:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Just a comment that if the film is notable in France, it's notable for the English Wikipedia. Notability doesn't have to be international and France is obviously a major country. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:31, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Gnews search under either version of its name reveals more than enough coverage to meet NFILM. Searching for the French title, I found this 2015 review from the Hollywood Reporter, for example. And there is enough French-language coverage in reliable sources. There's certainly tone issues with the article, I agree. But the film is notable enough. User:CinéPassion and the others are indeed a single purpose accounts, in the sense that they're all devoted to articles on Nicolas & Bruno ("a famous duo of French film directors..."; I've removed that peacockery) and their films. I was going to !vote keep on the basis of coverage, but the whole thing is obviously so promotional that I'm sympathetic to the idea that WP:TNT applies. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I just checked the French article: it's a puff piece concocted by the same SPAs FilmsChecker and CinéPassion. Moreover, on fr:Talk:Nicolas et Bruno, CinéPassion says "Je travaille pour Nicolas" i.e. "I work for Nicolas", proceeds to plead for an extension of his client's article in anticipation of future projects, then gets warned on WP:COI and WP:NOT. — JFG talk 21:32, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:42, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I also agree with the nominator that some larger action may be required for these accounts; let's see how things unfold here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Original French:


 * Keep as topic is notable despite its author inexperience or postings on other Wikipedias. What may or my not happen on Wikipedia France does not dictate what is notable to Wikipedia English, nor tell us how we interpret OUR guides and policies. Extensive coverage in French shows notability to France, and being notable to and in France is fine for Wikipedia. Sorry, we do not demand English-language coverage for all topics, nor do we demand nor expect notable French topics be notable outside that country. See WP:NONENG. We improve what is notable and improvable... not delete. Sheesh.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 21:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the reliable sources identified such as the review in the Hollywood Reporter as well as French sources. The article can be edited to remove overpromotional content. Atlantic306 (talk) 18:37, 16 September 2016 (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.