Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Night (2009 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 keep. Claims the topic meets GNG through discussion in multiple reliable sources have not been refuted, after a re-list. Discussed article tagging is a separate issue. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:45, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

One Night (2009 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems to be a fairly unknown movie, it says to have won three international awards, but all of them are just regional awards. We all know what count as the "world awards" in movies. it doesn't matter if the festival brand it as one, it just isn't. Viztor (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC)


 * @Viztor I gather "fairly unknown movie" is not a reason to delete an article about a short film, or there would be virtually no articles on short films whatsoever. Your suggestion that "we all know" what is and isn't a "world award" leaves me somewhat confused, and I suspect I won't be alone. I'm curious as to know how you define "world awards" and why only that and "fairly unknown" are your criteria for notability/deletion. Whether or not any film won an award or not is not a reason to delete any film's article. Notability for a film is that it played at film festivals, and this one played at, among others, Gimli and the Montreal World Film Festival (definitely a "world" FF), where it was reviewed in the Montreal Gazette, a notable publication. I'm not seeing the issue you have with the article based on your arguments as presented. Why is something coming from a "region" a disqualification? The Gimli Film Festival is the most important film festival in Manitoba, and one of the most important in Western Canada; it was a suitable venue for the director of this film, Shelagh Carter, to be awarded a Directors Guild of Canada award for one of her later features. While I could not work it into the article for lack of sources at the time I wrote it, One Night comes across as a stalking horse or dry run for her later feature Before Anything You Say. Leaving that to one side, the film is also notable for its origins (i.e., Carter's project was selected by the national body and funded at a level which in and of itself is probably half or a quarter that of a typical Canadian feature film, never mind a short) and, perhaps, for the connections Carter made at the Director's Lab (her regular cinemtographer and the film lead, with whom she planned a feature that came out only late last year, Into Invisible Light). (Edited multiple times) ZarhanFastfire (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Have you invited the other editors who have worked on the article to participate in this debate? ZarhanFastfire (talk) 23:33, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * And I've just realized that the first award in the list is from the WorldFest-Houston International Film Festival. I think this debate is over.ZarhanFastfire (talk) 00:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It is just impossible to find the film. And the problem is there are way too many awards in the industry, we're not IMDB and we're not going to write an article on every single one of them when there is just too little to write about. Viztor (talk) 12:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm certainly not arguing for writing about "every single one when there is just too little to write about", but you have not explained how that statement applies here. Be specific: how little is too little, according to policy. The article I created was assessed independently as Start-class from the beginning, not a Stub. That means there's more there than Stub articles and those are not deleted simply for having not very much in the article. The length of the article has nothing to do with the notability of the subject. Likewise, your statement that it's "impossible to find" is blatantly false and irrelevant. I don't even know what you really mean: you mean you can't find a DVD on Amazon? What? f you can't actually refute any of the arguments I've made above, and just keep repeating yourself ("not well known") you're not going to convince anyone. But we'll see if anyone else feels as strong as you do. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - won a few very minor awards. Not enough to meet either WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. On another note, I was canvassed to come to this discussion by the article's creator, . Please be aware that "inviting" people to join a discussion is not something you should generally do. Onel 5969  TT me 19:16, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @Onel Per WP:NFILM "The film features significant involvement (i.e., one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career." The director, Shelagh Carter, is a notable person and this film is very frequently cited as a significant film in her career, because, in addition to the not-insignificant award, per my description above, the project was chosen for development/funding by the CFC. NFILM goes on to say: "An article on the film should be created only if there is enough information on it that it would clutter up the biography page of that person if it was mentioned there." We certainly would not include everything in the article in Carter's bio, particularly the quote by her cinematographer.ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment The author left some messages on my talk page which hinted WorldFest Houston as a world class movie festival while in fact, as listed on their websites, they bestowed about 894 awards this year (+16 asian regionals). There are 628 mentions of "international" on Wikipedia's List of film festivals, and that list does not include "WorldFest Houston". Viztor (talk) 19:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, the notability test for film festivals does not hinge on whether they've already been added to List of film festivals or not. It is not a list that's been preselected for notability assessments such that a film had to be on the list before it was allowed to have an article at all — it's actually the other way around, having an article is the prerequisite for getting added to the list, but people don't always remember to add new film festival articles to the list once they've been created. So preexisting inclusion in that list is not the notability test for a film festival in and of itself — it took me all of three seconds to add it to that list so that it is in there now. Bearcat (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment in response to Onel. I did seek input from the small number of editors who have made contributions on the article. I am not aware that is inappropriate (as it would be if I invited a bunch of editors with whom I work cooperatively on a regular basis). In fact, I assumed it was expected as I have been "canvassed" before for similar reasons on RfCs simply for having conributed on the relevant page as someone who'd be "interested" in the subject. If that's not how it's done, I'll refrain from doing so in the future. I still don't see why that festival or its awards are the be-all and end-all of the article when there are so many articles on films that have none at all.ZarhanFastfire (talk) 00:55, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @Viztor. Again, you are confusing the issue by making this all about whether WorldFest is "really" a "world festival" and how many awards they give out. And just because they are omitted from that WP list does not mean anything. I could add it tomorrow, and you could remove it. It's irrelevant. I have moved a quote I had added here earlier which was better suited on that article's AfD, which I will not participate in further. It's really neither here nor there as far as I'm concerned. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 01:23, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Viztor (talk) 02:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep and flag for reference improvement. Yes, this could use a few more solid sources — but short films are routinely much harder to write long, highly sourced articles about than features are, because they don't get as many full reviews from film critics. Nevertheless, short films still can and do win significant notability-supporting awards and/or get designated as artistically or culturally significant, and can still pass WP:NFILM on that basis. Nominator is misrepresenting the significance of the film festivals in play here: WorldFest Houston is a long-established real film festival, not a PR-fraud operation, and Gimli is a major stop on the Canadian film festival circuit. (It is a Canadian Screen Award qualifying festival, for starters — and if you find it curious that Winnipeg doesn't have its own general film festival on the TIFF-VIFF-MWFF-CIFF-AFF-Cinéfest prestige tier despite being a major city that very much should have such a thing, but instead restricts itself solely to special interest and genre film festivals, well, "we don't want to undermine Gimli" is the reason.) The notability test for films also does not depend on one user's ability or inability to find them on the internet, nor does it depend on the film's preexisting "fame". In fact, precisely the point of Wikipedia having film articles at all has at least as much to do with helping people find reliably sourced information about lesser-known notable films as it does with having articles about franchise blockbusters. And note that NFILM includes a criterion that extends notability based on archiving, but does not include a criterion for "distributed on internet platforms like Vimeo or YouTube or Netflix or BitTorrent" — in other words, your ability to find it on the internet is not a notability criterion in its own right. Even completely lost films whose prints can no longer be found at all, let alone on the Internet, can still be notable. So, granted, the podcast and IMDb sourcing isn't ideal and could stand to be replaced with better stuff if possible: but I do still count four genuinely reliable sources here, which is quite enough. Bearcat (talk) 13:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Could you point me the four sources which you consider to be reliable? thanks. Viztor (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Three of Canada's largest daily newspapers and Canadian Cinematographer magazine is somehow not enough? Bearcat (talk) 19:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:12, 25 June 2019 (UTC) Comment The original two arguments for nominating the article for deletion have been refuted: (1) WorldFest Houston is a real and significant festival, as is Gimli, as is Montreal World. Nominator's attempt to devalue this article by nominating WorldFest's article has failed, result was keep; (2) "fairly unknown film" was never a starter. The nominator is now unofficially introducing a third argument by asking which sources in the article are reliable -- something they should be able to do for themselves, and if they cannot, they have no business nominating articles for deletion in the first place, which is something they've also been advised by senior editors on their talk page. I believe the problem may well arise from the difference between the threshold for notability on English Wikipedia, which is the lowest of the big language Wikipedias. The editor has not yet learned that whatever was the standard on Chinese Wikipedia, it's different here.ZarhanFastfire (talk) 15:07, 2 July 2019 (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.