Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mailbox (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The result was nominator has Withdrawn and there are no votes for delete.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 09:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The Mailbox (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Frankly I have some doubts this proselytizing short film has some enciclopedical merit. Cleaned up of false positives, Google book turns 0 results, and nothing relevant appears to be in Google as well. The article itself does not assert any claim of notability. Cavarrone 16:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - this was not a "proselytizing short film": it's topic is universal, reminding people to be mindful of their aged parents & grandparents, and there is no overt teaching of any exclusively Mormon (or even Christian) doctrine. As for notability, since it was only distributed by BYU and the LDS Church, non-Mormon sources are going to be scarce. Merging into List of films of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints might be preferable to deletion. -- 155.95.80.241 (talk) 17:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, if you use this Google search, you will find some results specific to this film. Likewise this query at Google Books does bring back a few results that are not false positives. -- 155.95.80.241 (talk) 20:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your inputs. Thanks to your string I now see three book sources, but sadly it is very trivial coverage, none of them goes beyond one sentence (at best), and none of them even mentions the name of the director. However I don't oppose to redirecting to List of films of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (I had missed this parent article, otherwise I would had boldly merged the article there). Cavarrone 05:14, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually the Journal of Religion and Film article has about 3 pages of text about the film (as indicated in the ref), the 1977 newspaper article is completely about the film (with 2 photographs of the principle actress), and the Sunstone article has 2 paragraphs about the film as well. Also if you read the Journal of Religion and Film article, it will tell you in the first few pages why things that normally matter to Hollywood cinema (such as director credit) aren't really considered of as much value in this context. -- 155.95.80.241 (talk) 15:16, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Wait, wait... I was referring to the Google Books link you posted above, not to the citations you added to the article. They look fine, nomination withdrawn. Cavarrone 10:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:51, 29 July 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.