Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Truth Shall Not Sink with Sewol


 * 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. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 00:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

The Truth Shall Not Sink with Sewol

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable film. No claim of notability, no refs look reliable. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - See Google. this film is notable in South Korea, besides, released in Busan International Film Festival. based on MV Sewol sinking disaster, so was controversial in South Korea. Kanghuitari (talk) 06:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * May be notable for Korean Wikipedia, but do not know if this meet Notability in the English Wikipedia. Controversial does not means that Wikipedia owes an article for the subject. Karlhard (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Incorrect suppositions,, your "does not belong here" is not supported by OUR policies and guidelines. English Wikipedia can cover ANY notable topic, no matter where it originates. English Wikipedia is not for English-only topics, it is simply that our articles are in the English language. And if controversy allows a topic to be discussed in multiple reliable sources, the English Wikipedia's GNG is met. Simple.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as a notable topic per WP:GNG. I Googled the film title and immediately found news coverage by Variety, Los Angeles Times, and Screen Daily., per WP:N, article content does not determine notability; coverage outside Wikipedia does. Per WP:BEFORE, you need to perform due diligence and carry out checks to see if the topic is truly not notable before resorting to WP:AFD. Please do this in the future so you can be confident that an article needs to be deleted. In the meantime, I ask you to withdraw your nomination; see WP:WDAFD. Thanks, Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 21:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have checked them all and all I see is controversy. Is based in non-notable actors or directors. I will not withdraw nomination because This is not notable enough for English Wikipedia. Karlhard (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It would be up to nominator to withdraw or not, not you. Being covered in multiple reliable sources is what shows notability. Topic origin is not a factor. Simple.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep A rather obvious keep, as well. Should not have been brought to Afd per readily available Google search results. Very poor form, per WP:BEFORE. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:48, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Google search results directs you to some controversial posts by notable newspapers/websites. At the time, the article is not notable. It may be case of WP:COI. Karlhard (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:GNG. Reliable sources covering a topic make it notable. Do you think that all of the sources covering the film are not reliable? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 23:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That is just idiotic. "Controversial posts by notable newspapers?" So we're supposed to disregard a Variety review because it's... controversial? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment as requested above, I've trawled the first dozen or so pages of google hits. All of the notability I see is reflected from the Sinking of the MV Sewol rather than cinematic. I'd be happy with a merge and redirect to Sinking_of_the_MV_Sewol. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh really? So a film review by Justin Chang, a film critic for the film trade Variety at a film festival is not cinematic. Well, I'll be. And ditto for the Twitch film review? Well, you learn something new every day. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The film is about the sinking, and its very production was controversial. Please read WP:GNG, which states, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article." How does this film not satisfy that? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 23:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Topic soundly meets WP:NF.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, I add some sources. Kanghuitari (talk) 02:06, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Anything that causes this much controversy is definitely notable, and it's even got English-language reviews that we can cite.  There really isn't much room to argue that it's non-notable; the controversy is specifically about the film, not the event. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:08, 21 October 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.