Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Last Will (film)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:00, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Last Will (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NFO, WP:NFSOURCES and WP:GNG. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and only newspaper listings on Newspapers.com. I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass WP:NEXIST. Per NEXIST, the sources have to be "suitable," and I don't think Horrorphilia is suitable enough. And even if it was, it's only ONE source (needs TWO OR MORE sources to pass NFO and NFSOURCES). The Film Creator (talk) 16:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:31, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 16:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:44, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, review at Cinemagazine  Donald D23   talk to me  23:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * And another, in Dutch. Production has received some coverage, here at least. So a reasonably decent page is possible on this film, which seems notable enough (Meaning Keep).- MY, OH MY! (mushy yank)  00:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Keep. The reviews cited above appear to be sufficient to support an article. Eluchil404 (talk) 07:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: We have three editors !voting keep and no other !votes other than the implied delete by the nom... I'd like some more input otherwise it'll be no consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti*Let's talk!* 12:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I'm sorry but why do you say that? There is a strong consensus that films with 2 reviews are generally accepted as notable. Accordingly the nominator was asking for 1 more review at least, when 2 were presented. So saying that without more input it would close as "no consensus" does not seem correct. The nominator's rationale might (and I don't think it would) justify a "no consensus" outcome if and only if no reviews had been presented. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  05:03, 30 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.