Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Impossible Itself (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   keep. -- Cirt (talk) 01:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The Impossible Itself (Film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable film, the article was created by the film's director. Corvus cornix talk  02:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:FILM, and I couldn't find any sources at all to determine notability for it. It has also not received any major reviews or awards that I could find. --Slon02 (talk) 02:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment While there are real concerns with COI, sending a film to AFD only TWO minutes after article creation seems a bit of a rush.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 23:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Not when there are no claims of notability as well as no reliable sources which prove the notability of the film.  Corvus cornix  talk  05:13, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, the assertion that the film was a documentary of a notable event and that it is used at universities ARE both valid claims toward notability. In such cases, tagging for cleanup and sources could have been a far friendlier way to get results, specially as articles from newcomers rarely spring into mainspace in an ideal condition.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:21, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: In beginning to address the newcomer's total lack of understanding of proper format for film articles, I see that there is an assertion that the film may have a notability through WP:NF #5. This will take further research.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 At ease dear gentlemen. Hold your emotions for now and please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  18:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I can find no reliable sources.  Corvus cornix  talk  05:14, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just takes a different gogle-foo than you were using, I suppose. For instance, I had no problem quickly finding an article about the film in the San Francisco Chronicle which spoke at length about the documentary, the filmmaker, and the documentary subject itself... and the article was excerpted at Goliath And there was an admittedly brief blurb in the August 2008 Jewish Journal announcing an opportunity to see a screening.  And there was an article in Mercury News telling of how out of the 50 or 60 documentaries screened at the Fairfax Documentary Film Festival, the film received top billing. And I also found sources showing its availability at some universities, such as University of Hawaaii  This took maybe 2 minutes. Wanna bet there are more?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And which of those sources makes it notable as per WP:FILM?  Corvus cornix  talk  07:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Time for school? WP:FILM is the project. WP:NF are the notability criteria.  Being discussed in reliable sources and being used in universities meets two of the criteria we consider per WP:Notability (films).  And my response was because you claimed that you could not find any reliable sources.  In two minutes I found that such sources exist, using perhaps a different google-foo than did you. Again, wanna bet there are more?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no need to be a dick. Let's have a reasoned discussion.   Corvus cornix  talk  21:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please do not take general elucidation as if it were a personal affront. I was being reasonable in politely remarking that both you and User:Slon02 had been pointing to the Project Film page rather than the page containing the applicable notability criteria. And toward reasoned discussion:  After you succintly stated you could find no reliable sources, I indicated what sources I was able to find in just a couple minutes, and then explained what applicable criteria might be seen to apply and how. That I found what you stated you could not does not make me a dick.. nor does my answering your questions.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep: This article certainly needs some work, especially with secondary references and COI.  Nevertheless, I find that it meets the notability guidelines for films, per Schmidt's findings, and it shouldn't be deleted at this time.  Epass (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Schmidt's findings. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2011 (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.