Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/It's Me, Matthew!


 * 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 no consensus. Spartaz Humbug! 09:40, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

It's Me, Matthew!

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable film appearing to fail WP:NOTFILM. Played at a few festivals and won a single small award, but lacks in-depth support. red dogsix (talk) 05:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - The article is supported by notable third party sources and follows all WP guidelines. If anyone wants to add to it or edit they can feel free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanmac50 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - The article fails to be supported by in-depth WP:SECONDARY independent articles.  red dogsix (talk) 06:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - Reddog, If you would like you may feel free to edit this. I can point out film articles on WP that have never won an award and have less notable references.At this point you have made this a personal attack to keep flagging this titled article. If you want you can feel free to add to it or edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanmac50 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Other articles have no bearing on this article. See WP:WAX.  There is no personal attack and frankly how you can make this statement is beyond me.  I am questioning the inclusion of the article, not you.  I suggest you read WP:AGF before you make any similar comments.   red dogsix (talk) 06:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Reddog, i did not mean anything by my statement. This is a very profound film that was based on a true story, that you should see to understand why I am adding it to WP. Moreover, I have supported all statements made on WP with notable third party references as WP's guidelines. No copyright is violated and everything is supported by newspaper, magazine, and third party websites noting the short film. If you would like to help out and add to it or edit. Please feel free. Any feedback is appreciated. Susan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanmac50 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  17:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I am the producer and I have a big scrapbook full of reviews that were published in the media. As I understand it, this will help with notability. HX magazine and festivals (talk) 14:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


 * All the refernces I have added when creating this page are from notable sources: magazines, newspaper, and festivals. All the statements have been backed up with reliable third party sources.
 * If reddog or anyone else cares to add to the page, that would be great. But all my references follow the notability guidelines set forth in WPSusanmac50 (talk) 04:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Reddog, please stop flagging and removing the photo I added to this page. It is my own copyright and I have donated it through WP donation to the public, 3.0 commons guidelines. I have signed and authorized it to WP upload to use it for the public donation use. I own the rights to the photo and image and have donated it to WP. ] (talk) 05:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - If you wish to donate material to Wikipedia, please read and follow the instructions in WP:DCM. Until you do so, the images will most likely be removed as copyright violations.   red dog<i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 14:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * weak delete - seemingly failing GNG as well as NOTFILM (I can't find anything that isn't a one-sentence mention or an un-RS), this not-feature-length film does not seem to meet the criteria for inclusion. That being said, there are a lot of one-sentence mentions... Primefac (talk) 05:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the comment above. The truth is this not being a feature film has nothing to do with it. WP has categories on here for Short films and other short films are on WP. There are enough third part sources about the film's credability including festivals it has been in. Also, you can see on those articles the dates they were written and that the short film is legit and notable. Rodsena37 (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Rodsena37Rodsena37 (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Rodsena37 (talk) 05:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I will add the full info in the articles if that help Thank you Rod, but yes WP has categories here for short films, so this not being a feature film is irrelevant. Moreover, I will add the full citation of the magazines and news papers which are more then just one line. Susanmac50 (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 06:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: Based on the wrong way and  have signed their comments on this page, they may be the same person. 64.134.64.190 (talk) 06:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Wow, yes Rod and I are the same person, right Rod?. I love how people throw allegations without support. Isn't that against the whole WP website to cite things without support? That's like me stating, Reddog and you are the same person?!  You know at this point, lets just it keep it  professional behavior to WP guidelines. I think that would be the best thing for everyone. Susanmac50 (talk) 07:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 07:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well... unfortunately the way that you sign things is fairly distinctive and not the common way most would sign their comments, even as a new, inexperienced user. It's possible that you might be the same person, but I think that it's more likely that the two of you happen to know one another IRL and as such, mimick each other's signature styles because you see the other doing this. If this is the case then it's understandable, however it would be best if you confirmed how you relate to one another to dispel sockpuppetry concerns. The situation is slightly more complicated than that so I would recommend reading over WP:MTPPT. It's not entirely against the rules per se to ask people to come and help, but you need to be very careful about what you say and how the other people argue for inclusion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:35, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: We'd need to be able to verify some of the sources that aren't on the Internet. For example, the article asserts that the film was reviewed by the Herald Sun, but the news source's title is "68 films to be shown at gay film festival". The title implies that these are films that have yet to be screened at the festival and that the news source is a list of films with brief synopses that are possibly based on press releases or information provided by the festival. In other words, this type of article is unlikely to be a review since most of these are articles written before the author has had a chance to review the film. The sources that can be verified just show that it screened at various film festivals, which is almost never something that would assert notability. It's assumed that the average film would screen at various festivals, so this isn't something that would give notability at Wikipedia. Also, sources like this one are considered to be predominantly routine notifications of events since it looks to be heavily based on a press release. The award from the WHIFF wouldn't be considered one that would give notability because as far as Wikipedia is concerned, the film festival and its awards are too minor for its purposes. It's harsh, but there are so many film festivals out there that give awards that WP has had to limit things to awards ceremonies that have received heavy enough coverage to where the ceremony/award/festival would warrant an article, which doesn't seem to be the case here. This link is just a passing mention so it'd be considered WP:TRIVIAL.
 * Now when it comes to Cinema Without Borders, this is slightly tricky. The main website itself would be considered a reliable source because it's listed in several academic sources as a WP:RS. However a look at the source in the article shows that it's a blog and a quick search shows that they accepted user submitted content. The page says that the submissions are reviewed, but it doesn't say how much editorial oversight goes into these submissions. It could be that they're reviewed thoroughly or they're given a cursory glance to ensure that it isn't comprised of objectionable material such as hate speech, threats, and the like. The heading on the site is "express your opinion on international & independent cinema" gives off the strong impression that it's the latter, as most user submitted content sites do not monitor for much beyond obvious issues that most forums would screen for. As such, I'm forced to assume that this would not be usable as a reliable source.
 * This leaves us with only a few sources that might be usable. If the HX Magazine sources are in-depth and not reliant on PR or just notifications of events, those would be usable. The same thing goes for the LusAmericano and Herald-Sun sources. My recommendation, since there are people on here that are clearly associated with the production itself, would be for you to upload clippings of these articles to your website. You could e-mail them to us, but scanning them and putting them on your website would be the fastest and easiest way to do this. Just make sure that you put in something that would show the paper/magazine and the date when it was published. If these are usable, then these would help the film pass NFILM. On a side note, is LusAmericano the paper LusoAmericano? If so, this looks like it would be a RS offhand. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Now as far as stuff about short vs feature length goes, the reason why some have mentioned this is because short films tend to be passed over by most media unless they happen to turn into media darlings or become controversial. It stinks, but it's unfortunately the common fate of most short films, regardless of their merit. Again though, if the off-line sources are usable then those should be able to assert notability. I'm just concerned that the HS source (or some of the others) is just a notification of an upcoming event, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Tokyogirl79[ You can verify by emailing Mr. Cliff Bellamy at Herald Sun and verify that he did review the film. We spoke to Mr. Bellamy, and he said he received screeners before the festival that he watched and that they were reviews. If you do not believe me, then you can call him or email him verify for yourself. --Susanmac50 (talk) 01:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)--Susanmac50 (talk) 07:01, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * As to answer your following questions.
 * The Herald Sun, was a review of haven seen the film because it clearly states that, "Ferreira skillful use of the flashback technique". You can verify by emailing Mr. Cliff Bellamy at Herald Sun, and verify that he did review the film. We spoke to Mr. Bellamy, and he said he received screeners before the festival that he watched and that they were reviews. If you do not believe me, then you can call or email yourself to verify.--Susanmac50 (talk) 07:06, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I can upload the Luso_ Americano newspaper article. It is in Portuguese text. Mr. Ferreira got part of cover page and entire page 11. The article was based on his past work in television and the making the film, It's Me, Matthew!. I can upload that for your review.
 * HX Magazine was at more then one screening of It's Me, Matthew! they gave Michael Musto a review on his performance. Again they saw the film and were in attendance at more then just one event since they cover gay community events in New York City, and being that Mr. Musto is celebrated highly and respected in the New York City community. Also, you can find a picture of Hedda lettuce and Michael Ferreira on IMDB It's Me, Matthew page, taken by HX Magazine.. How shall I upload you the Luso Americano article for your review? Susanmac50 (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:07, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, Mr. Ferreira was asked to host the 2009 Rhode island International Film Festival in drag that year. He is pictured on IMDB with Doris Roberts for that event as his drag persona, Carmella Cann, while his film was being screened there that year. there links online to support that. Susanmac50 (talk) 08:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * http://www.film-festival.org/Podcasts.phpSusanmac50 (talk) 08:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)SusanSusanmac50 (talk) 08:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * This is a link to an uploaded Luso-Americano Article about Mr Ferreira and It's Me, Matthew! Sorry if i uploaded under the wrong linkSusanmac50 (talk) 08:26, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:26, 24 January 2016 (UTC) Susanmac50 (talk) 08:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)susan50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, while I recognize that youtube is not a credible source for WP, off the record for everyone here reviewing my credibility and for that record, here is a link to confirm that Mr. McDerman aka Michael Ferreira  was in attendance for his film screening at North Carolina for the screening: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newpaper_article,_It%27s_me,_matthew.jpg Susanmac50 (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC),Susanmac50 (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)susan50Susanmac50 (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you provide scans of the reviews for the HS or HX Magazine? We just need to be able to verify these sources. This sounds awful and it's not meant to sound awful, but we can't accept things on the say-so of others. This is because unfortunately we've had things misrepresented in the past, sometimes intentionally, sometimes not, and the side effect of that is that offline sourcing is very easily challenged unless some sort of proof (images, etc) can be provided. The Luso Americano source is perfect, so that's one source that we can say is absolutely usable to establish notability. All we need now is to verify the other two sources that are supposed to be reviews and if they're in-depth, the article should pass NFILM. Now as far as the general pictures and videos of people at events, those can't really do anything for notability or verify that a source is indepth - only an image of the source itself, like the Luso Americano source can do that. They can be fun things that you can upload to Wikimedia Commons if you own the copyrights for the images (and I highly recommend that you do, since they sound like they'd be cool to have). Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:44, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * While going through my computer files I found these two additional clippings about the private screening in June 2008. Published in Next magazine June 13, 2008, page 7 issue # 15.50 top discusses private screening of It's Me, Matthew. PUBLISHED IN HX MAGAZINE JUNE 20, 2008 PAGE 18


 * Also, this was another one in HX I just found with a picture that is my copyright. Susanmac50 (talk) 11:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)SusanmacSusanmac50 (talk) 11:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * i want to send you a carbon copy of the articles to resolve this issue about the It's Me, Matthew! page.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_Me,_Matthew! I have carbon copy's of my citation and wanted to send them to you and don't know what is the best method? Do you have a personaal email I can send it to to expedite this process? Thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you. ~ Susanmac50 Susanmac50 (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC~ Susanmac50Susanmac50 (talk) 22:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You can e-mail me here. That will send a link to my email I used to sign up with Wikipedia and we can go from there. Offhand I think that you should be OK to upload news clippings to the film's website - most news organizations are OK with that as long as you credit them accordingly. Now as far as this goes, it's just a captioned image so it'd be seen as a WP:TRIVIAL source and wouldn't be able to back up the claims of the review itself, unfortunately. It's kind of tricky. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:33, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment I dealt with these editors while getting article Michael McDerman into shape. They appear to be separate people and mean well, but they are both very new to wikitext, including signatures, refs, and Special:EmailUser. I await a copy of the Luso-Americano article, as I could not find it online, and the deleted image referred to above. If this article does not pass here at AfD, I hope it can be userfied or merged into the Michael McDerman article.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   04:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I have gotten multiple images via email:
 * http://i.imgur.com/HVyiQUf.jpg from LusoAmericano, in Portuguese, which I do not read. "Luis- Americano, June 27, 2008 Cover photo and page 11" My previous cite: Mano, Henrique. Actor Launches Semi-Autobiographical Short-Film. LusAmericano (USA) 27 June 2008, Iss. 3515, pg. 11. Retrieved 2016-01-19. My new cite: Mano, Henrique. MICHAEL FERREIRA TEMS ORIGENS EM MANGUALDE - Luso-americano que faz carreira como actor aventura-se agora an realização - É semi-autobiográfica a primeira curta-metragem que assina como realizador de cinema (MICHAEL FERREIRA HAVE CHANGES IN MANGUALDE - Portuguese-American who is acting career adventure is now an achievement - is semi-autobiographical short film first signing as film director). Luso-Americano (USA) 27 June 2008, Iss. 3515, pp. 1, 11. Retrieved 2016-01-19.
 * http://i.imgur.com/bKq3a7Q.jpg from Next Magazine, June 13, 2008 issue 15.50 page 7
 * http://i.imgur.com/3T5N7yJ.jpg from HX Magazine, June 20, 2008 page 18
 * http://i.imgur.com/LCxtYRl.jpg from Rhode Island International Fiim Festival clipping
 * http://i.imgur.com/4hFYsHE.jpg "a photo clip from HX magazine as well tconfirming Hedda Lettuce and Chelsea Cinema." similar to the captioned image http://www.imdb.com/media/rm906683136/tt1261421 addressed above.
 * I only cited #1 per Primefac below.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   18:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm going to number these, just to make it easier. I haven't translated #1, but 2-4 are all just one-paragraph mentions. Nothing to demonstrate passing GNG. Primefac (talk) 18:52, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep as passing GNG per #1.  —  Jeff G. ツ  (talk)   19:58, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:44, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:44, 29 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed the sources suggested above, and I don't believe they meet WP:GNG, as they're trivial mentions. An award at the West Hollywood International Film Festival seems like a stronger claim to notability, but unfortunately I'm not seeing much to suggest that this film festival is particularly notable either. I don't know about HX magazine or how extensive the mention was there. I'd like to say that this film was notable, but I'm just not seeing anything which seems to me to meet the WP:GNG. JMWt (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Alts:
 * producer:
 * director:
 * lead:
 * actor::
 * actor:
 * actress:


 * http://cinemawithoutborders.com/userblogs/blog/2008/07/30/beholdthe-power-of-short-films/ Cinema Without Boarders--Susanmac50 (talk) 09:40, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, speaking of Next Magazine it is here on WP as a source. Second, Anyone who lives in downtown scene on New York City knows HX Magazine. Here are 3 links to HX Credibility:
 * http://www.edgemedianetwork.com/news///186165
 * http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/hx-magazine-in-crisis-6371475--Susanmac50 (talk) 09:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)http://djparis.com/hx-magazine.html  j--Susanmac50 (talk) 09:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, Michael Musto, who wrote this article I am quoting in the Village Voice. Maybe, you never heard of the (Village Voice), a very well known New York City Newspaper. Michael Musto, has been noted in the New York Post http://nypost.com/2008/06/05/starr-report-kathie-lee/--Susanmac50 (talk) 09:23, 30 January 2016 (UTC) as co-starring in the film It's Me, Matthew! Paul Anothony Stewart , a very well known American Soap Opera Actor for 25 years was mentioned in Luso_Americano as an actor in the film It's Me, Matthew! Feel free to google both of them on notability. I have a sent a clip of Luso Americano to Jeff G. which mentioned It's Me, Matthew!! Michael Ferreira , Paul Anthony Stewart, Michael Musto, and the film festivals.
 * --Susanmac50 (talk) 03:34, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * First, I have sent Jeff G. newspaper article, magazine mention, and Rhode Island International Film Festival Clipping showing the film played there. Second, the image that was put up on this page has been in the press many times and Jeff can confirm that because in two of the things I sent him and is under commons 4.0 to use. Please stop taking down the photo's they are not copyright violations. and Jeff G. has a copy to prove it in an email I sent him. Third, the Rhode Island International film festival is a very recognizable Oscar Award Winning Film Festival.. . . showing It's Me, Matthew! played there and at many other festivals. Moreover, West Hollywood International Film Festival, there is a third party link to the festival's website. If you do not recognize that then any film on WP that has played at a smaller festival and it is mentioned should not have not? Moreover, weather this film won an award or not is not what makes it notable. I can mention at least 15 films on WP that have never been nominated nor won anything. Plus there are  three notable actors in this film, as on WP. confirmation is at at least 4 different sources.  --Susanmac50 (talk) 02:47, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Unfortunately, as stated before, other articles have no bearing on this article - but I would venture to guess they have adequate coverage. See WP:WAX.  red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Michael Ferreira has been and mentions and associated with the film at Rhode Island International Film Festival, Luso Americano, Cinema Without Boarders, HX Magazine, Herald Sun, and Next magazine. Michael Musto has been associated with film in NY Post --Susanmac50 (talk) 09:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)http://nypost.com/2008/06/05/starr-report-kathie-lee/, HX Magazine., and Luso-Americano. Neil Stephens has been mentioned as the director in a clip for Rhode Island international film Festival, Paul Anthony Stewart has been mentioned in Luso-Amerciano and Next magazine. I think all four people above have been cited in various sources associated with this film. --Susanmac50 (talk) 02:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC) --66.65.176.212 (talk) 17:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * None of the (immediately) above are very helpful. Short and one line local media mentions are not enough to give notability. JMWt (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep You can verify by emailing Mr. Cliff Bellamy at Herald Sun and verify that he did review the film. We spoke to Mr. Bellamy, and he said he received screeners before the festival that he watched and that they were reviews. If you do not believe me, then you can call him or email him verify for yourself.--Susanmac50 (talk) 07:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I am sorry but I am finding it difficult to understand, why a gay film like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slutty_Summer has notability to be on WP and It's Me, Matthew! does not? I can reference at least 10 other films on WP I have found just like this one.  --Rodsena37 (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Unfortunately, as stated before, other articles have no bearing on this article (AfD). See WP:WAX. On occasion other stuff is included that does not meet the requirements for inclusion.  Regardless, that article has no bearing on this AfD.   red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 15:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment You know (reddogsix) you should really start hunting down some of those other films on WP that have one and two sources. Because you are really focused a lot on this film, It's Me, Matthew! from the first day this page was put up you have been flagging it.. Also, please do not undue my comments. Here is another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Tendencies --Rodsena37 (talk) 15:46, 31 January 2016 (UTC)--Rodsena37 (talk) 15:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)--Rodsena37 (talk) 15:56, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - Why should I look at other films? Also I have not changed your comments, the only thing I have done was reset the format to allow for easier reading.  With the exception of changes to Mmcderman comments, there have been no changes - the Mmcderman comments were removed because they redacted your comments.  Are you saying you and Mmcderman are the same person and by changing their comments I have changed yours?  red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I am finding so many films on WP that have much less sources then this film does. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Swimmer_%282013_film%29 and a lot of then have imdb as a source. If Imdb is being used a source for these films, then why can it not be used as a source for this one? All these films have Imdb noted as source with only one or two festival clips. Susan Mac has cited: Cienma Without Boarders, Luso-Americano, NY Post, HX Magazine, Rhode island International Film Festival source, Herald Sun, IMDB, Next Magazine. at least 8 different sources which is at least double the amount of many of these short films i am finding on WP--Rodsena37 (talk) 16:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC) --Rodsena37 (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - Maybe you should look at the other films since you have been very focused on trying to flag this one. It took me less then 5 min. to find over 10 other films that have way less citations then Susan has presented for It's Me, Matthew!. Also, No, I am not Mmcderman, but I noticed one of the comments I left was taken down right after you put up yours. Which is why I stated that.

Maybe I should start doing what you do and start flagging all these films I find on WP to be taken down lacking proper citation?--Rodsena37 (talk) 16:27, 31 January 2016 (UTC)--Rodsena37 (talk) 16:27, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Friend, imdb is not to be used as a reliable source see WP:CITINGIMDB. I can appreciate that it is hard to understand this process, but as others have explained to you above, the fact that other pages exist is not something we can consider when determining the merits of this page. That's just how these things work, and nothing about you. I thank you for flagging other pages and will set in motion the consideration for deletion for any of these that also do not appear to meet the notability standard. JMWt (talk) 16:31, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Susan did not use IMDB as a source. I happen to notice when looking at some other short films and independent films on WP, in less then 5 min. I found over 10 films on here that have only one or two citations. This film does not even have any, lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slutty_Summer I still feel Susan has shown between Cinema Without Boarders, Luso-Americano, and the other clips that It's Me, Matthew! is notable short film.--Rodsena37 (talk) 16:40, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, so flag them for deletion. This doesn't change the fact that the film we are discussing here is only mentioned very briefly in all of the references suggested above. That isn't enough to show notability for inclusion in wikipedia. JMWt (talk) 16:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

No, I will not flag other films for deletion. I was just pointing out what I found when surfing through other films on WP. Also, I don't think the article in "Luso-Americano" and "Cinema Without Boarders" is small. A whole page article is small? Also, the NY Post is a major newspaper to be mentioned in. --Rodsena37 (talk) 16:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, you are going to have to step away from the keyboard and start talking to me civilly as per WP:AFDEQ. I appreciate that this topic is important to you, but I am not "out to sabotage others", I am simply part of a community trying to help with the implementation of the inclusion policy of this encyclopedia. JMWt (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I was actually not refereeing to you as the other user. Moreover, "Luso-Americano" and "Cinema Without Boarders" look pretty extensive for a mention. --Rodsena37 (talk) 17:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC)--Rodsena37 (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Just some examples of stuff I found in 5 min: --Rodsena37 (talk) 18:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody's_Gone |
 * 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Express:_Aisle_to_Glory |
 * 3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Company_%281992_film%29
 * 4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minka_%28film%29
 * 5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Zip
 * 6) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_%281990_film%29
 * 7) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_Echoing_in_My_Being
 * 8) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonnie_%26_Alex

Just a few more things I found --Rodsena37 (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This one has one reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hole_in_the_Paper_Sky
 * This one has none: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Day_Out
 * IMDB ONly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Capsule
 * IMDB ONLY https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semne_%C3%AEn_pustiu
 * Only One notable reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_Goes_%28film%29
 * Only one reference as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_%282003_film%29
 * No reference. Just won 1 award at the same film festival It's Me, Matthew! played at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taps_%282006_film%29
 * No reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boys_Life_6
 * No References https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutlass_%28film%29


 * Comment - For the third time, other articles have no bearing on this article. See WP:WAX. I suggest you try to focus on the task at hand - to show this article meets the criteria for inclusion.  Continuing to try to convince everyone there are other articles that do not meet the criteria will accomplish nothing.  red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment I was just pointing out what I found in 5 min. Imagine how many more I would find if I spent an hour or two. Just bringing it to everyone's attention how this is a huge double standard on WP and maybe an issue that really needs to be addressed. This is not just one or two films. I have found over 40 films on here with the same issue in just a few min. (Reddogsix) you should really take sometime to look at them since you are SUPER concerned with articles meeting WP guild-lines.


 * Back to the subject on had, Susan has fulfilled the criteria with how many citations she presented. At least 2 or more have extensive coverage, along with others supporting mentions in major publications. Especially for a short film subjects, which many shorts never even get any coverage at all, as you can see based on how many show up on WP with no references. Just something to keep in mind when reviewing this. --Rodsena37 (talk) 19:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC) 19:10, 31 January 2016 (UTC)--Rodsena37 (talk) 19:29, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I do not see a "double standard" on Wikipedia, I only see a large job that everyone of us volunteers tries to reduce by each of us trying to doing just a little bit. You may feel it my job to right all the ills of the world within Wikipedia, but for goodness sake, this is only Wikipedia, not the ending of world hunger.  If you have time to do this more power to you - unfortunately I do not.


 * Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with you that the article meets the criteria for inclusion. It is not up to you or me, but to the community. You need to understand this is a community effort not run or decided by you, me, or anyone else, but rather by the community.      red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 19:37, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree it is a community effort. I am just shedding some light on the subject for people to see how many short films are on WP that do not meet there guild line. Especially when it comes to short film subjects. That's all! I m just pointing out an important observation for the community to consider when evaluating this article. --Rodsena37 (talk) 20:07, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - For the last time, other articles have no bearing on this article and have no relevance when ascertaining if this article meets the criterial for inclusion.  See WP:WAX.  red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: I feel that the article subject is notable, just barely. While the film festivals have been mostly small, and the coverage not pervasive, it's still there.  A suggestion to susanmac50 and Rodsena37: Let the discussion play out and leave it be for now.  Talking about flagging lots of other articles and getting frustrated won't help anything.  Be patient and let the process take it's due course, please. Chrisw80 (talk) 08:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep at best as it seems there's enough for an article. SwisterTwister   talk  05:46, 6 February 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.