Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Brides in the Bath


 * 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The result was   Nomination Withdrawn. The nomination has been withdrawn. The talk of redirection as suggested by a couple can be discussed on the talk page (non-admin closure)  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 23:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The Brides in the Bath

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:GNG GiraffeBoy (talk) 20:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 01:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 01:38, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  Ascii002 Talk Contribs GuestBook 01:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to George_Joseph_Smith. I couldn't really find anything to show that this film ultimately passes notability guidelines. There are a few hints that there may be coverage, so I think a redirect with the history intact would be a good idea here in case it ever surfaces. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   04:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable TV drama. We have articles on thousands of them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes... but they have sources.   Schmidt,  Michael Q. 20:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * As a TV show, it is its own source. A source does not have to be something on the internet - any media will do. And lack of sources is not, in any case, a reason for deletion. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:52, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect as suggested by . I looked for sources and found nothing suitable for establishing notability. Fails WP:NF.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 20:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources found which could allow imrovements and per nominator's withdrawal.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 09:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect seems the simplest idea - it is a good film, but reliable sources/ media coverage appear to be non-existent Alligators197401:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC) (Nominator)


 * Title:
 * Actor:
 * Actor:
 * Actor:
 * Actor:
 * Production:
 * Brazil:
 * Sweden:


 * I did some searching and found it spoken of here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. A couple might even be considered SIGCOV, but almost all speak toward this film in relationship to the murders. Unless sourced and greatly expanded, I still think it best that this stub be redirected to the parent topic.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 10:46, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Clean UpI'm leaning towards granting it a reprieve, pending an overhaul. Is there any general consensus about tv movies and notability on wikipeida? GiraffeBoy (talk) 21:28, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * keep Big star names in the original production (Kemp & Griffiths) and it's a drama that is still being broadcast on major channels 10 years later. It was shown again just earlier this year. 82.132.245.90 (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)


 * And it's on dvd which is a rariety for tv movies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alligators1974 (talk • contribs) 23:28, 11 September 2014‎  (Nominator)


 * keep I originally listed this for AFD but the discussion has convinced me it should stay - it has more media coverage and available sources than I realised. GiraffeBoy (talk) 22:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Observation: some signed and some unsigned, GiraffeBoy and Alligators1974 are the same person. His comment above may be taken as a nominator's withdrawal per sources found and offered. Let's get this one fixed up.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 09:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I withdraw the nominationGiraffeBoy
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 10:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)




 * keep My nomination was an error - there are far more available sources and media coverage than I realised and the film has been recently released on DVD. GiraffeBoy (talk) 22:30, 21 September 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.