Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Gran final


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

La Gran final

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non notable film, failing WP:NFILM prod removed by creator, one of several films all from the same festival created by this same editor. Most nominated (excepting those winning several awards given then benefit of the doubt) Gaijin42 (talk) 17:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Covered in multiple sources.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)doubtless improve the single source article. Edison (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as a copyright violation. Found cut and paste of 143 word section from one of the references: http://www.fcat.es/FCAT/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=329&Itemid=37 . No indication that the source is public domain or that the contributor is the copyright owner. Edison (talk) 21:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC).
 * The content is actually CC licenced. You can see the CC logo in the rightmost column towards the bottom of the linked page. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops. CC license noted. Edison (talk) 21:29, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep I've added several refs including feature stories in the Taipei Times and Spain's largest cirulation newspaper. I don't believe notability is in question, at this point. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Covered in multiple, easily found sources. Meets WP:NF. Rather than nominate all these film stubs in order to punish their author, the project would be far better served by allowing them to be improved over time and through regular editing. We do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A good number of the noms I've reviewed are not so easily referenced, if at all. However, I've raised a similar point at the ANI initiated against the creator by the nominator, here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep a minimal WP:BEFOFE shows notability. A withdrawn (for this and all the mass-nominated notable titles) is suggested. Cavarrone (talk) 09:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly meets notability now. First Light (talk) 20:23, 13 March 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.