Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spirit of the Glass


 * 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 no consensus. Daniel (talk) 00:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Spirit of the Glass

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable film, seems to fail WP:NFILM. Tagged for notability since March 2018. Was de-prodded because "notable cast", but notability isn't inherited. WP:NOTINHERITED Donaldd23 (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 13:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete it is time for Wikipedia to stop being an IMDb mirror.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:24, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:BEFORE doesn't reveal anything about this film that would make it notable and it does not receive sigcov in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources. Therefore it fails the basic measuring stick for notability. As noted by the nominator, notability is not inherited. -- A Rose Wolf ( Talk ) 14:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm finding coverage for the sequel but not really the first film. Dunno if it's a case of it releasing during the early-ish years of the internet in 2000s, but there's not much out there. My suggestion is that if notability can be proven for the sequel, that we keep this page and just cover the sequel here rather than having two pages. It would fit a bit better than having one on the sequel and having some content in it on the first film, I suppose. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG. Kolma8 (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep and redesign the page for the film and its sequel which does have reliable sources coverage which has been added to the article, imv Atlantic306 (talk)
 * Keep: Per Atlantic306. Article should be restructured similar to Bagets since the sequel seems to be more notable than the first film. ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 14:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Try again, no new comments after last relist, hopefully we'll get some.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Onel 5969  TT me 14:56, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Article has been updated with extra sources since the original Deletion Nomination, I agree with Atlantic306 Eopsid (talk) 10:53, 7 February 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.