Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Blair Witch Mountain Project


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 00:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

The Blair Witch Mountain Project

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. I won't buy the argument that since many of the cast are notable enough for articles this filmette is notable; not only WP:NOTINHERITED but also those I looked at seemed to have very slender claims to notability. The Andrew Hurst who describes it as 'cute' is not a notable critic, merely some opinionated wannabe ( sorry, design-savvy content strategist and digital consultant) with a blog, & while I can find out enough about Hal C. F. Astel online to make me believe that he probably does exist I can't find anything to suggest that his opinion matters.TheLongTone (talk) 14:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC) TheLongTone (talk) 14:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as I cannot find any reliable sources covering this in a significant manner to warrant notability and have a Wikipedia article. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 17:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as it is as notable as The Bogus Witch Project in terms of both sources and notability. I'll work on the article's quality, bring it more up to shape, I promise you that. This article's barely existed a day. MacCready (talk) 14:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Reviewing The Bogus Witch Project, it has actual Google Books results where this film does not, so there is no equivalence to be drawn. Even with that being the case, The Bogus Witch Project may not be notable enough for a standalone article but could be mentioned at The Blair Witch Project. I'm very hard-pressed to find that to be the case for The Blair Witch Mountain Project. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 14:45, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ...this argument is, of course, invalid; see WP:OTHERSTUFF.TheLongTone (talk) 14:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'm finding little mentions here and there - so far not enough to really justify inclusion, however enough to where it would merit a mention at Blair_Witch and the main page for Escape to Witch Mountain. (There's already a mention at the page for EtWM.) See mentions here, here, and here. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡)  23:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Although if pressed to say where this should redirect to, I'd say to the director's page since there is a little about this in his article. ReaderofthePack (｡◕‿◕｡)  23:40, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 17:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge and redirect to the director article where the cast and crew could be covered in a collapsed section, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 18:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   23:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep This needs to be improved but if you look through the American films category it would be selective enforcement. --JAMillerKC (talk) 15:28, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I can find nothing on this topic, a Proquest news archive search came up absolutley empte.  Not a mention in books, scholarly sources - zip, zero, nada.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:57, 11 November 2018 (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.