Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killjoy Goes to Hell


 * 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. Closing as NC, and suggesting re-nom in 2-3 months (non-admin closure)  TheSpecialUser TSU 00:05, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Killjoy Goes to Hell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It pains me to nominate anything by Full Moon Pictures for deletion, but this is another film I stumbled across tonight that lacks reliable sources. I searched to try to find some, but ultimately found no coverage for this movie at all. There's just no notability for this movie. It doesn't help that the article is written with promotional buzzwords and contains a copyvio for the movie's description. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:17, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:17, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 22:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Keep - What about this? Found a few reliable sources for the movie and I think it does qualify under WP:N. Vacation9 (talk) 00:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 01:07, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The link you've given is to IMDb, which is not usable as a reliable source. Especially since this only links to a summary for the film. As far as other RS goes, I wasn't able to find any and if they do exist then you should link to them either on the article or in this AfD. Just be aware that just as IMDb is never usable as a source to show notability, you also have to ensure that the "sources" you're mentioning are not just links to merchant sites, non-notable blog entries, press releases, and a score of other things that are not usable as reliable sources. All I could find for the movie were various links to merchant sites and other unusable links. Nothing that Wikipedia would consider reliable.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:32, 4 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Neutral - Found quite a few reviews but I have no experience with film sourcing so I don't know if these sites are reliable. --Cerebellum (talk) 18:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 04:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I didn't find the HN.N one when I'd initially searched, so that one is definitely usable. However, the rest of them seem to be of the non-notable review site/blog review variety, which cannot show notability- especially the LetterBoxHD site, which seems to be the type of site where anyone can sign up and give a review. It even describes it's as "a social network for sharing your taste in film", so it's definitely not considered a reliable source. It takes a lot for a review site to be considered reliable and so far out of the sites you've given, only HorrorNews.net would be usable as a reliable source to show notability.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theo polisme  02:30, 19 November 2012 (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.