Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miami Love Affair


 * 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. Sourcing to meet GNG seems rather tenuous at the moment, but I don't think there is quite enough consensus to delete at this time.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 16:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Miami Love Affair

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable film, does not have significant coverage by independent sources, coverage that exists is mundane (here is the casting, here is the trailer) and film appears to have had no post release coverage BOVINEBOY 2008 21:51, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete: Fails GNG and NFILM. Nothing found to support notability. Kolma8 (talk) 07:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Coverage found in Variety [] Donaldd23 (talk) 11:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems to have some coverage to satisfy WP:BASIC. Grandruskiy48 (talk) 15:59, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets basic and variety is ok. Desertarun (talk) 14:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete I looked for sources but did not turn up enough to convince me that WP:GNG or WP:NFILM is met here as it has not, to my knowledge, received full-length reviews from two or more nationally known critics, and does not seem to be historically notable or award-winning otherwise. WP:BASIC is about people, so I assume thet above comments are referring to another guideline like WP:SIGCOV, but the Variety source is kind of weak — it's just a 127-word announcement about the film being at AFM, its casting, and a quote from the director, and I don't think that kind of writeup is indicative of a film's notability. DanCherek (talk) 15:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 22:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * KEEP. Notable. I added a plot and ref. Film has coverage in variety.com, rottentomatoes.com, filmaffinity.com, filmfestinternational.com, constructionsupplymagazine.com, etc. SWP13 (talk) 02:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * On Rotten Tomatoes, the film is simply listed, there are no professional reviews listed. Filmaffinity is a database website, does not speak the notability of the film. Film Fest International seems to be a website that pulls listings of films at various festivals, only lists the plot of this film and does not actually provide coverage of the film. ConstructionSupplyMagazine is a blog??? BOVINEBOY 2008 09:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete That Variety piece is just a casting announcement and doesn't meet the spirit of WP:NFSOURCES since the WP:FRUIT of those is really a press release that is not independent. I'm a bit surprised this didn't get more coverage... a bit sad. -2pou (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Found another piece at Artnet [] Donaldd23 (talk) 02:35, 15 June 2021 (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.