Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/REV (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 DELETE. J I P &#124; Talk 06:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

REV (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Homemade film with no coverage whatsoever in secondary sources. Fails the notability and verifiability criteria. —C.Fred (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy A7 - Non-notable self publishing and advertising. Canterbury Tail   talk  02:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I considered A7, but it's presented as a film—not a web movie—so I don't see it fitting A7. You may have a point about spam, however. —C.Fred (talk) 02:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Alls im saying is i dont see why it being there is so wrong. If people dont want to see it then they dont need to look it up. i bet it will have plenty more likes on fb. the page was made yesterday. give it time. Do high school papers count as secondary sources? When i say it isnt doing harm i mean that it being up doesnt change anything on the website. I dont see a reason for its deletion other than it isnt a hollywood film. just because it isnt doesnt mean people dont care about it.--Chris1321 (talk) 02:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy - As Spam, if not, certainly fails WP:NOTFILM. red dog six  (talk) 02:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not here for you (or anyone) to get free advertising. If you want to promote your film, open your wallet and pay for advertising like every other filmmaker does. If your film becomes notable somebody else will write the article for you. --NellieBly (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I never said it was here for me. I dont get why everyone is so against it. It doesnt effect any of you. It shouldnt be deleted just because it isnt famous. It is something that exists. Not everyone knows about it but how can they when people like you shut it down in a matter of seconds? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris1321 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as unambiguous spam. So tagged. --NellieBly (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2011 (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.