Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Brides of Sodom (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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The Brides of Sodom (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unremarkable horror movie. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails notability criteria for films. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  19:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * delete - no reliable third party sources in the article and none found in a search. Fail WP:N. Active Banana   ( bananaphone  19:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)




 * Delete for now per WP:TOOSOON. As the film was only released to a small market last month, there is not enough available (yet) to show it meeting WP:NF.  I would not be adverse to it being userfied with our thanks back to its author for continued sourcing as such become available.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:28, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure thanks are in order - see this ANI post about their likely copyright violations. All images I reported in that posting are still there as of right now, if anyone would care to look into it... Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:20, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ouch... another new editor who does not understand the ways of Wikipedia, and apparently does not understand the requirements for proper licensing/attribution of film images. I see 73 inexperienced edits since March 2010, with 71 of them during the last two weeks of August. Would it be too much of an extension of good faith to think this user might benefit from a little guidence?  I look at it this way... if deleted from mainspace and userfied, and even if never worked on or ever improved, Wikipedia loses nothing.  But if the editor does a turn-around, learns our processes, and become a valued contributor, the project might gain an asset.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:01, 2 September 2010 (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.