Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time Share (2000 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. czar 00:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Time Share (2000 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable television film. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. Found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. I did find a review from The Dove Foundation in my WP:BEFORE search, but the article needs more coverage in order to be eligible. The Film Creator (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. I contemplated my decision a bit, but I'm going with Delete. There's the Dove review above, plus this LATimes piece and this that announces Timothy Dolton in the role, as well as this Buffalo News entry. However, I don't think that's enough to make an article long enough to be beyond stub length. Other newspapers sources only repeated the same summary as part of listings, which isn't anything nontrivial. That tends to be the trend for most of these forgettable crap TV movies. A major TV station will quickly shit something out, newspaper TV listings will, ya know, list them, and the only coverage it gets is a Common Sense Media rev, Dove rev, and passing mentions in other sources IF it's lucky enough to get them. I've definitely faced this hard fact when looking for sources about Home Alone 4. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 20:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I imagine you have to look at the publisher of the newspapers as content comes through affiliates. For example, all Gannett publications have USA Today content. – The Grid  ( talk )  20:36, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Probably keep. In addition to Dove we have Radio Times. Then there are the different titles from all over the world. In German I find reviews that look very good, look ok, also exists, is a press release independent of the film's producers, and a shorter tv blurb. One of the leads is German, so... Geschichte (talk) 19:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Apparently a popular movie, with an international release, and with Timothy Dalton and Natassia Kinkski... however, there simply isn't enough RS here to establish whether it is notable or not. Deathlibrarian (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think there is, and have listed them. Geschichte (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 03:51, 26 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Bobherry  Talk   Edits  02:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the identified German reviews which show it is notable in German which is enough for WP:GNG which makes clear that non-english sources are acceptable for notability purposes, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 04:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - publication in LA Times and Imdb reviews . Kirill C1 (talk) 16:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm having some trouble with my computer but just wanted to add that I found this review from Der Spiegel. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  02:07, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Der Spiegel seals the deal; the film was definitely notable in Germany. Geschichte (talk) 08:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The review in Der Spiegel by Simone Mahrenholz is significant coverage in an independent reliable source. The article may need to be updated to reflect the critique though: the reviewer finds that Kinski just isn't funny, and Dalton comes across as usual: plain, virile and shallow. Vexations (talk) 15:15, 4 January 2022 (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.