Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sniper Special Ops


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:13, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Sniper Special Ops

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

Does not appear to meet notability requirements. Film Link review is the only one there is, Rotten Tomatoes only has it, nothing else (same review used as the one source here). Oaktree b (talk) 21:44, 14 August 2023 (UTC) - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  08:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Oaktree b (talk) 21:44, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep see also for example:
 * 1) https://www.looper.com/279844/the-best-and-worst-steven-seagal-movies/
 * 2) https://theactionelite.com/sniper-special-ops-2016-review/
 * 3) https://tvmag.lefigaro.fr/programme-tv/programme/sniper-special-ops-f152915200
 * 4) https://wizzley.com/the-seagal-report-sniper-special-ops-2016/
 * 5) or in this book


 * Looper is a trivial few lines, Figaro is a synopsis for a tv guide, the other two don't seem RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:50, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Looper has.... 3 paragraphs on the film. Le Figaro contains a one-line critical assessment. Etc. - My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)  16:01, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, so we have one goodish source with Looper. The rest aren't useful. I can't open that Gbook preview from my location due to copyright reasons, so I can't comment. Oaktree b (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Add the following for example, and even with your count (with which I obviously do not fully agree) you have 2.
 * https://www.mymovies.it/film/2016/sniperforzespeciali/
 * My, oh my! (Mushy Yank)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The review notes: "Already narratively weak to say the least, with Mosby’s men forced to deal with another mission before they tackle the case of a missing team member, the film really drags when Seagal is on screen. Trapped in a room with a fellow fallen soldier, the Under Siege star appears utterly disinterested with his part in this whole thing; staring off into the middle distance whilst mumbling all his lines. If you have a stockpile of irony stashed away, you may be able to sit through this with enough good favour, but that’s not an admission of approval."   The book notes: "So with a title like Sniper Special Ops, it feels like we can sit down with Steven Seagal and friends and we know what we're getting into. And Sniper Special Ops starts out strong! The very first scene gives us everything we want in an exciting film about a sniper. We've got a special ops team moving into a war-torn village in the desert. There's witty banter and snappy repartee from the troops. We've got large men in desert camo weaving through a village, while Chandler (Seagal) and his spotter watch from 550 - 650 meters away to cover their advance. And twelve-point-five minutes into this film, he abandons that sweet, silenced, long-range dealer of death and as far as I could tell he didn't pick it up again for the entire movie. He stands up, grabs an assault rifle, and proceeds to spray bullets from the rooftop. From 550 - 650 meters away."   The article notes: "Questa decisione consente di costruire un clima di tensione notevole e di dare allo spettatore, comodamente seduto in poltrona, la sensazione di stare assistendo a un vero scontro. Anche la scelta di procedere successivamente con un montaggio parallelo contribuisce a tenere desta l'attenzione sui due versanti della narrazione. Ovviamente la retorica non manca ma, grazie forse anche alla presenza di due personaggi femminili, viene proposta a livelli accettabili." From Google Translate: "This decision makes it possible to build a climate of considerable tension and to give the viewer, comfortably seated in an armchair, the feeling of being witnessing a real battle. Even the choice to proceed later with a parallel editing helps to keep the attention on the two sides of the narrative. Obviously the rhetoric is not lacking but, thanks perhaps also to the presence of two female characters, it is proposed at acceptable levels."   The article notes: "And unpredictability. Last week, Amoia’s latest movie, “Sniper: Special Ops,” was released on video. When the film’s producers cast her as the female lead opposite Steven Seagal and Rob Van Dam, they were impressed with the clips from Amoia’s video reel that showed her dropping by rope and firing guns. Except Amoia never had a role where she was swinging on a rope. Nor had she fired a gun. The producers had accidentally received the wrong reel with Amoia’s name attached, so hired her thinking they were getting someone with a different skill set. But Amoia was there, and willing, and shooting was about to begin. So she stayed, learned the lines (and how to shoot a weapon) and kept the job."  There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Sniper: Special Ops to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 01:02, 20 August 2023 (UTC) </ul>


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.