Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loaded (2008 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The result was speedy keep per WP:CSK #1: withdrawn by nominator. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Loaded (2008 film)

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

Article fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did a WP:BEFORE and found nothing suitable to pass WP:NEXIST. The Film Creator (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. The Film Creator (talk) 18:22, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep as did find one full review at DVD Talk here, but more needed imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Also there is a full review from this Dutch film source here imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Atlantic306, just barely scrapes NFILM. Also found a really short pre-production article from The Hollywood Reporter (perhaps usable) and a third review from The National.  ツ LunaEatsTuna  (💬)— 00:09, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per above. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 04:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I withdraw the nomination per consensus. Good work finding those suitable sources, everybody. The Film Creator (talk) 00:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Provided sources are sufficient to establish WP:NOTABILITY. Shawn Teller (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2023 (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.