Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World's Finest (fan 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   delete. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

World&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Fan film with no notability asserted or possible Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete—— It doesn't fall under any of these. Leonard^Bloom (talk) 17:07, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Film is from follow-up to the clearly notable Batman: Dead End. Received independent news coverage from reliable sources     at the time of release. Article may need sourcing, but the notability is there - it easily meets several of the points linked above. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 17:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I fail to see which points you think it meets. None of the linlks you provide are reliable sources. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - on the subject of reliable sources, we will disagree. As to the page linked, under "other sources of notability", point 1 is met (the film caused DC to shut down all superhero fanfilms at the San Diego Comic Con), and point 2 is met, from the contributions of Sandy Collora and Michael O'Hearn.TheRealFennShysa (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The sources you cite appear to be fan-published news sites or blogs, and so fail WP:V under WP:SPS. The notability requirements are slightly different. Michael O'Hearn is clearly notable, but for that to be a justification for the inclusion of this film, it would have to a) represent a significant aspect of his career (I doubt this, given the body-building awards and Gladiators appearances). Sandy Collora is of unknown notability; it is certainly asserted, and many big name films are cited. Whether a minor designer is notable is up for question, but as he seems to be largely uncredited on the films listed, the situation is even murkier. What evidence do we have that he was actually involved? If he is not in fact notable, then he can't be used as a justification for this film's inclusion. Your final point was that it fulfills point 1 under "other sources of notability"; your (uncited) assertion concerning DC does not I think represent the kind of 'unique achievement in cinema' the guideline is talking about. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete notability is not inherited. --Killerofcruft (talk) 17:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no claim of notability --T-rex 16:41, 1 July 2008 (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.