Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Temecula Valley International Film Festival


 * 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. (Non-administrator closure.) NorthAmerica1000 03:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Temecula Valley International Film Festival

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A local film festival without references. The only reference I could find was from a local newspaper which acknowledged the festival had been cancelled in 2012 due to budget issues and suggested the organisers might try to bring it back in September 2014. Crystal ball gazing aside, WP:NOTTEMP applies but I can't find any other significant coverage that might allow this to meet WP:GNG. As an organisation, it doesn't meet WP:ORG and as an event it wouldn't seem to meet WP:EVENT either.

This AFD nomination has its roots in two others where proponents suggested that winning at award at this festival substantiated the notability of a short film and its director. Stalwart 111  23:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

This is the only source I was able to find. And these are two related AFD discussions: 1 and 2. Stalwart 111  00:12, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Mention of cancelation in the local paper does not prove something is notable. If we had articles on every festival that ever had an article in the local paper, this would flood Wikipedia with articles on minor, short-lived festivals.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet WP:NOTABILITY. The article does not even state what city the festival is held in. These small venue festivals have proliferated over the years. Some cease almost as quickly as the began. Some grow and become deserving of an article. This one does not. MarnetteD | Talk 04:33, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unlike the nom, I was able to find additional coverage, allowing this topic to push at WP:GNG.. I do not expect this to have world-wide coverage, nor even be covered in The New York Times, but it has coverage.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 08:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No, no - I found those too. "Coverage", perhaps, but I can't see how coverage in multiple (very) local publications could possibly allow this to pass WP:GNG. I didn't suggest it needed nation-wide coverage but I'm not even sure we could get to "state-wide" coverage with what we have so far. The vast majority of it is published in the valley itself. Some of the authors are on a first-name basis with the organiser. Independence issues aside, how does coverage from "the guy around the corner" demonstrate that this is a notable festival among a wider readership? Some of that isn't even about the festival - it's university news about a film to be shown at the festival based on (it seems) a press release. Stalwart 111  10:27, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Independent reliable sources are what they are, and we do not expect world-wide coverage for any topic, as long as we do have coverage that can al ow creation of an article that serves our readers by providing content and context. But yes, a couple of the other links were thrown in not to support WP:N, but simply to address someone up above saying the "article does not even state what city the festival is held in"... an addressable issue. Thanks.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 07:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Though it applies to organisations (and though these are community organisations and the events they run), consideration of audience has, for a long time, been a factor in notability. My local farmers market gets coverage in my local paper every month. It even gets a mention in our area's neighbourhood watch newsletter. Again, nobody is suggesting "world-wide" coverage but coverage from someone other than the local paper with an office in the same street is preferable, yes? Otherwise every local street party, farmers market, school carnival, church fete and trade show should get a gig. It obviously doesn't work that way and the line in the sand had always been the extent to which something has received attention from beyond it's local area demonstrating notability among the wider community. It's the principle behind WP:GARAGEBAND and myriad other essays, guidelines and policies. Stalwart 111  07:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Incubate We shouldn't keep an unsourced article in mainspace, but the "What links here" shows that this is a valuable topic for the encyclopedia.  IMO it is an interesting topic, from a interesting locale of the U.S.  The title has the word "International", which kinda disproves the "too local" theory.  A notice of cancellation adds to WP:GNG notability.  An event that runs for 15 years is not "short lived".  Unscintillating (talk) 05:38, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Not unfair, but (I'm Australian) by that logic the Armidale International Film Festival (link) would be a blue link because it deemed itself "international" in scope. We already have an article for the Byron Bay International Film Festival which redirects to the festival's old name. They changed it in 2008 to include the word "international". That article has even fewer references than this one (and so will possibly be nominated next). But my point is that I could add the word "international" to anything I do but that wouldn't make it notable. I wouldn't be opposed to incubation but the festival ran for 15 years without generating enough non-local coverage - what suggests a few more months would help? Stalwart 111  06:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * To answer your WP:WAX, it may be time for an article on the Armidale International Film Festival. It may not itself it get coverage in The New York Times, but it's been going on for 10 years and is getting coverage where it is and for what it is. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. Thanks.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 07:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not a matter of "other stuff" to say that we expect coverage from beyond an event/organisations (very) local area. In the case of Byron Bay I conducted the usual WP:BEFORE checks and found plenty of sources from state-wide and nation-wide media - more than enough to substantiate notability. I've realised its actually a good analogy for this subject. A "local" festival that has gained genuinely international recognition and the coverage to go along with it. Stalwart 111  07:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * And being international doesn't prove that it is notable, either; all I said was that the word "kinda disproves" the "too local" theory. The above discussion implies that sources are only available from Temecula Valley, which isn't a populated place.  In contrast, the article makes the claim that films from 20 countries have been screened.  Given the implied wide reach of the sources from this valley, they may be enough.  Unscintillating (talk) 07:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. References provided.  Noted.  Notable. -- do  ncr  am  02:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  → Call me  Hahc  21  01:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. We need a custom WP:FILM/R Google search, like the custom WP:VG/RS search.  There are hits from Dread Central, Screen Daily, The Hollywood Reporter, The Hollywood Reporter, The Hollywood Reporter, and Variety.  Many of these articles are short or focus on awards awarded by the festival, but they demonstrate that high-profile, non-local reliable sources consider this a notable festival.  Not every festival or its award receives this kind of coverage.  Local sources can be used to fill in the particulars about history and founders.   If nobody else bothers, I'll see about trying to remember to fix up the article, but I've already got three or four articles queued up for a complete rewrite. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2014 (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.