Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Motor Film Awards


 * 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 delete.  Sandstein  18:23, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

International Motor Film Awards

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't find any independent reliable sources: not even mentions. ColinFine (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. ColinFine (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. ColinFine (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment: Since the AfD nomination an editor has added a dozen-plus references. I did not look to see if those meet 'reliable sources' standards. David notMD (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Could you please elaborate on why this is nominated for deletion? International Motor Film Awards was renamed from the London Motor Film Festival in 2017, and I feel the article is well formatted and meets the quality criteria of Wikipedia. It is of no lesser quality than substantively similar articles (such as other film festivals etc) and it is a legitimate event which has been running for a number of years. You are welcome to check the references, they are reliable sources. Thanks, Janipewter (talk) 22:57, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * because when I nominated it, it had just one reference, and that was to its own website, which is not independent; and because a search did not show me any independent references. I see that has added a load of references, which I will look at (but not now); but I notice that all of them are references for particular films winning the prize: there still does not appear to be a single independent reference to a source which discusses the award itself. That is the gold standard for Wikipedia articles: see WP:GNG. --ColinFine (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The article sourcing has been improved. Please take a look! Thanks everyone for participating and assuming good faith!

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Keep or delete? Don't just comment, tell us what to do here.
 * Comment (original nominator): yes, twenty six references have been added, but not one that contains substantial material about the Festival. Reference 2 is about the 2015 winners, and has a couple of paragraphs about the festival. That would work as a second source if it were coupled with a more substantial independent piece about the festival; but AFAICS the other 26 references are all about particular films nominated or winning. It is possible that one or two of them have a paragraph or two about the Festival (I doubt it, but I haven't looked); but unless one of them has substantial material about the Festival and that material plainly does not come directly from the Festival but is somebody's independent work, the article does not establish notability for the festival. this is not a comment about the quality, importance, or popularity of the Festival: it is about whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for whether Wikipedia is prepared to host an article about it. As for other articles: that is not relevant: there are many substandard articles in Wikipedia, some of which should be deleted if anybody gets round to it. See other stuff exists.  --ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Many of the newly added sources are problematic. for example, isn't by an independent journalist but by the Carfection audio podcast. "We're celebrating our win at the International Motor Film Awards". The list is very long and frankly exhausting to go though, but a few stand out as particularly unncyclopedic. furrows.co.uk? A car dealer is a source now? Come on. Vexations (talk) 13:31, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I reviewed all the sources and found that there is one source that is likely generally reliable:roadandtrack.com it's owned by Hearst Communications, Inc. and hs an editorial staff. The article that is used as a source, unfortunately is written by a friend of the winners of the "Best Journalism Film" award, who writes "Congratulations! It's a well deserved win according to a biased Hungarian", and doesn't really say much about the subject (the award) at all. The other sources are press releases, agencies, brand consultants, trade magazines, and yes, used car salesmen. Vexations (talk) 02:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: Hi, apologies - I'm new to this! I understand a lot of the sources are not that reliable due to being made about nominees/winners sorry about that. What about the two articles on Speedhunters (reference 2 & 8), both articles are an independent source that have substantial material about the subject. This is my first Wikipedia page and I'm still gathering sources to improve it and avoid deletion.PewterCityGym (talk) 20:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The issue isn't the reliability of the references,, but their independence and substantial coverage. It is possible that the Speedhunters items will do, but not I'm not convinced that they are independent, especially since the 2015 one says that the award ceremony was compered by "Speedhunters’ very own Bryn Musselwhite". --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 13 February 2020 (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.