Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hospital (2013 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   incubate. The page can now be found at Article Incubator/The Hospital (2013 film) J04n(talk page) 10:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The Hospital (2013 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Inadequately sourced article about a 2013 film that was apparently released in 2012. I'm unable to find any reliable, independent sources with which to establish notability per WP:NFILM. I was only able to find self-published sources. - MrX 01:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The film had its world premiere today (3/22/13) in Dortmund, Germany. A quick web search brought up three different reviews and several reports from independent film and horror websites, including Ain't It Cool News. http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61583#4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Accusingbridge (talk • contribs) 02:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The big issue here is finding sources that Wikipedia would consider to be reliable. AICN is definitely usable, but so far most of the reviews I'm finding are by blog sites that are considered to be non-notable. There is some chatter about it on some of the horror sites, but most of those articles are almost entirely taken from PR, making them little more than primary sources. The IndieGoGo isn't really usable either, as it also seems to be a primary source at best. I'm leaning towards incubating this unless more sources don't become visible by the end of the AfD. There's just enough out there to show that more sources could become available in the near future, but barring their actual appearance, this doesn't quite pass notability guidelines yet and we can't keep films based on coverage they may or may not get. I'm still searching though, mind you. 03:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Incubate per my argument above. There's the AICN review, which is helpful, but so far the sparse coverage in RS are based upon press releases or just reprint them verbatim. There is the hope that since they posted the PR, that some of these sites might give it a review sometime soon, so I'm suggesting incubation until that point. I want to note that getting PR reprinted isn't a guarantee that the sites would review anything, mind you. I've seen BD and the other sites republish PRs, yet give no actual coverage of the film beyond that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   03:55, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Incubate I've corrected the article per MOS:FILM to reflect the film's FIRST release date of October 31 2012 and, following upon work done by Tokyogirl79, performed some minor cleanup and sourcing. Since it is now circulating in horror festivals, it has received attention from less acceptable genre sites, yes... but as such acceptable ones such as Dread Central, Bloody Disgusting and Ain't It Cool News have decided to pay it attention, we can certainly incubate this for a short time to see if it gains a little respect from other horror genre websites.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:11, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as per significant coverage. LenaLeonard (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran ( t  •  c ) 22:49, 29 March 2013 (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.