Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life (AKA The Boy Who Commits a Murder)


 * 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 delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Life (AKA The Boy Who Commits a Murder)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fail WP:NFILM. References given are not reliable sources - Own WIX website, a couple of sites you can submit your own film for review and amazon. noq (talk) 18:38, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as per above - Fails NFILM & GNG. – Davey 2010 Talk 21:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. KGirlTrucker81huh? what I'm been doing 22:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:PERX. — Sam Sailor 03:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - - I myself use "Per above" even without adding on to it if I deem it pointless, If someone above me had said "Fails NFILM & GNG." then I simply would've said "per NAME" because it's stupid to copy & paste the answer above you when you may aswell just say "per above", Not only that but  could've been going to bed but what wanted to quickly chip in before leaving, I only tend to use PERX if there's tons of keeps with them but one here & here isn't really going to matter :) – Davey 2010 Talk 15:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It would been awful to copy-paste the same reason given but I only use "per above" for the same reason. KGirlTrucker81huh? what I'm been doing 20:24, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with you both, it would be awful (and maybe even stupid?) to just "copy-paste the same reason", but, alas WP:VAGUEWAVE. Should we be as frank as Velella is below: all three articles in this set are disguised promo. — Sam Sailor 22:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Low-budget featurette, with an astonishing amount of detail considering the lack of sources. Fails WP:GNG and any criteria in the SNG. — Sam Sailor 03:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nomination. All part of a bigger promotional exercise which is not wanted here.  Velella  Velella Talk  15:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as a poorly disguised promo. -- Finngall   talk  23:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can find nothing to show that this movie is ultimately notable enough for an article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete for failing any portion of WP:NF. If it ever receives decent coverage, the topic can always be resurrected, but for now it is simply TOO SOON.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 21:23, 15 September 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.