Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milroy Goes


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Editors can create a redirect if they choose to do so. Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Milroy Goes

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

This appears to be a non-notable filmmaker with no significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. He has directed several non-notable films, ad films, and music videos, including Welcome M1LL10NS, a non-theatrical release whose notability is questionable. The currently cited sources offer nothing beyond passing mentions, and a Google News search yields no helpful results. This fails to meet the criteria of WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is any more support Redirection as it looks like the sourcing doesn't hold up for scrutiny. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:08, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, India,  and Goa. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 04:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 04:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Based on my check, I found no in-depth coverage from multiple independent and reliable secondary sources. This means the subject completely fails to meet WP:GNG. The majority of the sources are around his films. Grab Up  -  Talk  05:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: Significant coverage in independent (although some articles include interviews), reliable sources. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  08:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * (and if the majority of sources is considered to be around his films (not sure that can be said, but let's assume it is the case, it means that the films may be considered notable, so that he would meet WP:DIRECTOR). - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  08:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don’t think the article about his film meets WP:GNG as it requires in-depth coverage from multiple sources. The cited sources seem unreliable to me or are full of quotations from connected individuals. It fails WP:NFILM as no reviews were found and WP:NFO because the film only received coverage at the time of its release. To pass, it requires “publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film’s initial release.” I can nominate that article anytime soon. Grab Up  -  Talk  09:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Mushy Yank, could you point out sources that provide "significant coverage"? WP:SIGCOV requires coverage that "addresses the topic directly and in detail." Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, almost all the sources are merely name drops. Additionally, I agree with Grabup that the film they directed appears to be non-notable as it lacks the coverage required by WP:GNG and shows no evidence of notability under WP:NFILM.
 * Regarding your claim of meeting WP:NDIRECTOR, it is weak for two reasons: first, the film is likely not notable, and second, there is no coverage that discusses the subject in detail. WP:BIOSPECIAL states that "If neither a satisfying explanation nor appropriate sources can be found for a standalone article, but the person meets one or more of the additional criteria: Merge the article into a broader article providing context." However, this is likely not possible due to the weak notability of the film. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 09:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * At random, for example:
 * (https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/It’s-time-to-go-‘Over-the-Top’-for-Konkani-cinema/161417)
 * (as was mentioned in the Afd about The Victim) (https://www.heraldgoa.in/Cafe/Good-days-ahead-for-Goan-cinema/108329)
 * (It's Goa)
 * These are just examples, it's +- short but significant imv, and there are many of those. If really everyone agrees this is not enough, nor for the film(s) nor for him, may I suggest a redirect for all of them to Konkani cinema (another guideline might apply if one considers the regional scope), that might help add prose to the page, which is very listy. I'm not that interested in this filmmaker, to be honest, and will probably leave it at that (I am not watching this), Best, - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  11:21, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don’t think Heraldgoa’s covarage can establish notability. And Itsgoa is a self-proclaimed blog based site according to their about us page. As it says “  ” Grab Up  -  Talk  11:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's Goa: A blog, yes, technically, but not a personal one and that is what matters (WP:EXPERTSPS). As for O Heraldo, not sure what you mean, but it's one of the (if not the, in English) main newspapers in Goa!! Again, a redirect to Konkani cinema might be considered. Really no time to make any further comments, sorry. Decide what you think is best. Thanks. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank)  11:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's Goa is not only a blog, but the article you mentioned above is an interview, and such articles are not accepted for establishing notability. Additionally, there is no evidence of who runs that blog or their background, nor are there details on their editorial policies. Such sources fall under WP:QUESTIONABLE. The section "The Folks Behind The Jokes" on their about us page states, "Our writers come from all walks of life, and through our social media handles," confirming that they lack real editorial control. They also encourage people to send in their stories and experiences, share their events and happenings, or create discussions around the articles they post, further undermining their reliability. The other two sources you mentioned are just passing mentions and are not even close to WP:INDEPTH. GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 12:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: I don't even think redirection would help, almost TOOSOON. If his film was eligible for the Academy nomination, but didn't make the cut, it could represent the start of the notability journey, but nothing yet. Sources as explained above aren't helpful Oaktree b (talk) 12:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Although the film came out in 2018, it's had enough time to get critical coverage; that nothing has been found in the last 5+ years is proof of non-notability for this person, likely also for the film. Oaktree b (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Insufficient evidence of in-depth coverage even though there are many references that disguise it as such. The sources aren't reliable enough. Haruka  Amaranth  14:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: This may need rewriting but doesn't meet our WP:SIGCOV. When an article is WP:MILL, there are more or less no substantial edit to make it notable. Also WP:LOTSOFSOURCES cant help either. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 08:50, 31 May 2024 (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.