Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nightfur


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Nightfur

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

A movie that I am not convinced passes the WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. It was PRODed a few years back, but that was contested due to the one review from DVD Talk being a reliable source. However, as far as I can find, that is the only piece of coverage in reliable sources available. I tried various searches trying to find other reviews, and was unable to find any outside of that one. Rotten Tomatoes also lists zero professional reviews for their entry on the film, as well. The single piece of coverage in a reliable source is not enough to pass the WP:GNG, and the writer/director is non-notable themselves, so there is no valid merge target. Rorshacma (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Film. Rorshacma (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Not only is it clear that the BEFORE was handled appropriately--I can't find anything more--it also is not clear to me that the film is the primary topic for this name, as there is a Warriors character apparently bearing the same name. eBay and Amazon both offer this for sale, so it's clearly real... but amazingly little on it, with 0 each news or scholar hits. Jclemens (talk) 01:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. One reliable review is insufficient for WP:GNG or WP:NFILM, the critic from DVD Talk is probably not nationally known, the requirement for NFILM criteria 1. My WP:BEFORE only found this, a non-RS site without editorial policies, only a vague staff page with the editor-in-chief being an an independent film critic, who is a proud member of the OFCS, in contrast, other writers of the site are self-described as enthusiasts/fans, so the site does not appear to be a subject-matter-expert WP:SPS.  VickKiang  (talk)  22:02, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 * DVD Talk is pretty selective about its reviewers, so a review from the site would count towards notability. It's just not enough on its own to establish notability. Historically the site has been routinely seen as a RS on here and it's also a site that's frequently referenced in academic and scholarly sources. The specific reviewers aren't really an issue since the site as a whole is reliable. That's like saying that a review from the NYT or Boston Globe isn't usable because the staff reviewer isn't as well known as say, Dennis Harvey or Michiko Kakutani. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  13:26, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the detailed reply! I had a look at the reviewer qualification, he has a bachelors degree in English and is writing in a WP:RS. DVD Talk has been recommended/mentioned by other RS, e.g., 1, 2, 3, I wasn't contending it was non-RS (though my vague comment might led to misunderstandings, so apologies), but I personally disagree that a review from DVD Talk would count as a nationally known critic, which IMO major nationwide or statewide newspapers, e.g., NYT, Boston Globe, would quality instead. But I should have worded better in that I do believe that the DVD Talk is usable and counts towards WP:GNG ( apologies for my imprecise wording), I just don't know if it qualifies towards WP:NFILM criteria 1 which is probably debatable. Thanks.  VickKiang  (talk)  20:27, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Newspapers aren't really the mainstay of reviews like they used to be. They're still pretty major, but there's been a definite shift to online sites for various reasons, one of which is decreasing print readership. Not all sites are usable, of course, but places like DVD Talk are usable for criteria 1 since they've been widely recognized - including as sources in academic and scholarly sources like this and this. There are some people for these sites that are more recognizable than others, but few places have a dedicated reviewer on staff - even newspapers tend to have more of a "part time" or "gig" writer than a full time employee like they used to. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  19:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per my statement above, DVD Talk is a reliable source as they're pretty selective about what gets posted to their site, but it's not enough to establish notability. I did a search for sourcing and found very little. I found some coverage about filming, but that's it. There's nothing to make me believe that there's more coverage out there somewhere, so I think what's on the page is pretty much it and it's not really enough to show notability in my opinion. We have a blog source, a local article about filming, and one good source - definitely not enough. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  13:35, 25 November 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.