Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spencer (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. (non-admin closure) — Berrely  • Talk∕Contribs 17:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Spencer (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Film fails WP:NFF. Nothing notable on the film's production. It is WP:TOOSOON.

And as WP:FFILM noted, we should ask this question: "does the topic under discussion have the in-depth and persistent coverage in multiple reliable sources over an extended period of time so as to be presumable as "worthy of note"?"

In this case is NOT. Kolma8 (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC)


 * this cannot be serious, are you really nominating this article without taking into account the director, the actors involved and the story it tells based on a true story? I have seen that you only dedicate yourself to nominate hundreds of articles a day for deletion, don't you have anything better to do? You have dedicated yourself to seeing my history of creations and you have nominated them en masse.  Bru no Va rgas  Eñe'ẽ avec moi 15:43, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment All of those are arguments for WP:NOTINHERITED and should be avoided in deletion discussions. Film must stand on its own, not taking into account all of those other non-factors. Donaldd23 (talk) 19:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , it is always a bad tone to use ad hominem and even more so to lie. Please keep those attacks off this platform. Kolma8 (talk) 13:17, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Kolma8 (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:17, 16 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep I found at least some sourcing on my search, although I think this may be a little TOOSOON.--🌀 Locomotive207 - talk 🌀 (Formerly Kieran207 ) 00:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep as there is enough coverage of the production of the film in reliable sources such as Hollywood Reporter, Deadline and Pitchfork for a pass of WP:GNG. A future film only has to be notable to deserve an article not exceptionally notable. Also the essay Wikipedia:Planned films is not a policy or guideline and carries little weight, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficient coverage in independent reliable sources to pass GNG. I cannot parse A future film only has to be notable to deserve an article not exceptionally notable and I doubt the closing admin will be able to either. Cheers!  ——  Serial  12:48, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * All I mean is that it is enough to pass WP:GNG without any other stipulations, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2021

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes GNG sufficient coverage in independent reliable sources. Jaysonsands (talk) 18:30, 24 May 2021 (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.