Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Swibel


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:15, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Justin Swibel

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Advertisement; violates WP:COI. -- Gmatsuda (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The nominator is rather randomly proposing deletion, often speedy deletion, of clearly notable entertainment industry figures. Last week he proposed speedy deletion of an Oscar nominee. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) 13:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete . I couldn't find any significant coverage of Swibel himself, and the only award I could find details of is a student award at a minor film festival.--Michig (talk) 15:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I looked back at the first version of this article, which had a lot more in it, and if the worthwhile stuff in there could be sourced, then the article would be fine. There are some pointers to the awards and some additional coverage. I think we should allow some time for the article to be expanded, sourced, and tidied up.--Michig (talk) 22:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Though having said that, there is a list of claimed awards here for which I couldn't find a single reliable source.--Michig (talk) 11:45, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. - 68.183.55.64 (talk) 00:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems notable from NYT review. COI is not a reason to delete.Yobmod (talk) 11:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The NYT review says little about Swibel - it may go some way towards making the film notable, but I don't think it would count as significant coverage of Swibel himself.--Michig (talk) 12:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Have to agree about the NYT review. Maybe the film is notable from that, but not Swibel. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 15:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahhhh... but since he wrote and directed it, wouldn't the notability be his as the filmmaker?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 00:03, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete: this subject barely grazes WP:CREATIVE, but the NYT review doesn't go far enough to assert notability. If multiple sources can be found that are something more than a review of his film (and are actually about him), then I'm willing to reconsider. Until then, though, it's not going anywhere.  one brave  monkey  08:37, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. The NYT review, which is the only reliable source, is a review of the film, not of the subject, and notability isn't inherited. Stifle (talk) 10:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep There are actually 2 reviews, of two different films.  Making two   prize-winning films is notable. DGG (talk) 00:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- raven1977 (talk) 02:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per being an award winner. Have just done some cleanup to the article. More sources needed.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. One review is sourced, but brief and with little detail on Swibel. I couldn't find the other one. In terms of the awards, one was a student award, the other was a "DRAMATIC SHORT AWARD" at the Black Point Film Festival - I don't think either would count as a major award. The best sources I could find were this and this, which to my mind are not enough to support an article. One or two sources giving significant coverage to Swibel himself, and it would be different.--Michig (talk) 07:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * the NY Review of Books and the NYT  reviews by itself are enough for notability.  Reviews by such sources for  2 different works is enough. The prizes are an added factor.  DGG (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Concur. His works being reviewed... different works by multiple sources... assure his notability. Amn yes, the awards are simply icing on the cake. As for the review listed in the article that you cannot find, in light of all the other coverage of his works, an assumption of good faith in its existance is in order.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 16:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying the review doesn't exist, but without being able to see it, it's impossible to determine how significant the coverage of Swibel is. Where is "all the other coverage of his works", btw? A couple of brief reviews, and blurbs from festivals that had shown the films is all I could find. I'm not really bothered either way on this article - I'm just trying to judge it based on policy and guidelines.--Michig (talk) 17:19, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * See above - first version of article had significantly more content and areas where notability could possibly be backed up by sources.--Michig (talk) 22:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reviews of a film director's work are about the thing that the director is notable for, so are about the director. We accept articles about rock stars', politicians' and athletes' work as providing notability: why have different standards for film directors? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:45, 23 October 2008 (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.