Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Till We Meet Again (2015 film) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. With a coi issue ip votes get less weight - especially as they are not specific Spartaz Humbug! 18:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Till We Meet Again (2015 film)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Article is bombarded with sources but lacks any that establish notability. Film lacks full-length reviews. Has some awards but none are major duffbeerforme (talk) 03:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 04:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 04:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 04:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. It definitely looks like there's some COI editing going on here, but I'm not sure about the notability.  I did some minor cleanup on the article to fix the worst of the promotional content, peacock wording, and undue emphasis on awards.  It looks a bit more presentable now, but there's still the problem of significant coverage in reliable sources.  As it stands right now, most of the sourcing is primary sources (interviews, awards pages at film festivals, etc). NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Alts:
 * director:
 * actress:
 * actor:
 * actor:
 * studio:
 * studio:
 * recognition:

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 04:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Has sufficient article accreditation, has notability and won some greater awards though not the very major ones but still. references in the article are almost all directly pointing to the topic and the film.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.30.33 (talk) 01:36, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 21:46, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ""Comment"". Most related articles can be found listed at these two pages, please (more experienced Wiki Users) review and validate their significance. http://www.johnmatton.com/articles/ and http://www.tillwemeetagainmovie.com/press/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.30.33 (talk) 04:25, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep .This article has plenty of information and the film is notable.for receiving awards.In fact this article is a lot better than the thousands of others that have far fewer sources..In my opinion all films should have a wiki article ,why is there such a desire to restrict information?46.208.73.116 (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, has won a handful of minor awards, but nothing I can see that pushes this past the WP:GNG, despite the bombardment of poor sources in the article. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:28, 29 November 2015 (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.