Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Southern Gothic Productions


 * 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   merge to Hilarie Burton. Stifle (talk) 08:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Southern Gothic Productions

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Declined the speedy and prodded. I'm really sorry (because I'd love to see the film industry in North Carolina grow), but none of the sources establish notability, and I couldn't find anything useful at Google archives, either. If this is deleted, please re-create the article after you've got significant and extensive press coverage. - Dank (push to talk) 02:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- - Dank (push to talk) 02:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions.  -- - Dank (push to talk) 02:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I was riding the fence on this one; as the sources to me indicate the closest-of-borderline notability claims; but given that this one has at least marginal claims to notability, I am giving this the weakest possible support. Since "Strong neutral" is not really a !vote, I am leaning slightly towards keep.  I would not miss it if gone, but there may be enough here.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  03:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of notability andy (talk) 08:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There's sources, people updating it, and it's a new company well on its way. There's other things less important on wiki that are still there. I say keep there's no harm with having it. --  —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeytonMelissa (talk • contribs) 01:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)  — PeytonMelissa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * See WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and WP:NOHARM. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep This company is in its beginning stages. Sure there may not be the extensive media coverage yet, but I don't see how that's grounds for deletion. Check out the blog and see the dedicated followers there and the numerous projects they have coming up. They have sources, there are dozens of people working extremely hard to keep it running and leaving it on wiki would be just one more way for it gain coverage, I think. I don't think there's any harm in keeping it on wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmmdenver  • contribs) 01:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC)  —  Nmmdenver (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * See WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:ATA. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I think that the article should be kept on the basis that there is some notability, and the article will be updated in the future with more important sources. It's a start to something great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwateyou (talk • contribs) 02:11, 28 May 2009 — Cwateyou (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —PC78 (talk) 16:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:N. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Hillarie Burton. A vanity production company, they are ten a penny, any information can be housed at Burton's page, or any film pages. Darrenhusted (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect (changing my implied vote) per Darren. - Dank (push to talk) 18:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per Darren. Anybody else smell socks?--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 20:02, 2 June 2009 (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.