Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little Fish, Strange Pond


 * 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. Nominator has withdrawn his proposal but delete opinion make a Speedy Keep unfeasible. Liz Read! Talk! 04:38, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Little Fish, Strange Pond

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no suitable or reliable sources or reviews to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE and no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. The Film Creator (talk) 18:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: We now have the proper name. Giving it some more time Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  03:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Zero hits on the movie, some scattered hits on the use of the phrase. Some come up with Galafinakis who starred in the movie. Oaktree b (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Should actually be at Frenemy (film), which is the reason for zero hits (the title here ended up being changed after a failed theatrical run, which it did have as it came out before Zach Galifianakis's spike after The Hangover to use him on the cover to drive rentals). Will investigate further because I know there were more.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Found this review in the Austin American-Statesman  Donald D23   talk to me  20:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Additional references have been added to the article since the latest delete !vote. Are these sufficient? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:20, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete even with the correct title I found very few hits. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep, I think, based on the coverage here:
 * https://www.newspapers.com/clip/103283749/austin-american-statesman/
 * SLOTEK, J. (2010, Nov 05). 'Frenemy' flick comes up short of expectations. The London Free Press Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/frenemy-flick-comes-up-short-expectations/docview/2218932119/se-2?accountid=196403
 * https://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/review/45983 CT55555 (talk) 14:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep as a reception section has been added to the article since nomination that includes details of reviews in reliable sources such as The Austin American Statesman and DVD Talk so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I withdraw this nomination since there are now two RS reviews. The Film Creator (talk) 01:36, 24 June 2022 (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.