Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wrota Europy


 * 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 Wrota Europy, no consensus on Syzyfowe prace, as there has been no discussion of its merits one way r the other. I could let this run another week to see if a consensus emerges on Syzyfowe prace, but since the main subject of the AfD is clearly a keep, especially since the nominator effectively withdrew that nomination, it seems less confusing to close this with no prejudice against opening a new AfD covering Syzyfowe prace alone, if anyone desires to do so. Rlendog (talk) 00:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Wrota Europy

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not meet the criteria Leticja (talk) 22:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because [It not meet the criteria too]:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Leticja (talk • contribs)
 * Not meeting what criteria? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk 01:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

1. The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics. 2. Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release. 3. The film was deemed notable by a broad survey of film critics, academics, or movie professionals, when such a poll was conducted at least five years after the film's release. 4. The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release. 5. The film was selected for preservation in a national archive. 6. The film is "taught" as a subject at an accredited university or college with a notable film program. 7. The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career. 8. (?) The film represents a unique accomplishment in cinema, is a milestone in the development of film art, or contributes significantly to the development of a national cinema, with such verifiable claims as "The only cel-animated feature film ever made in Thailand" (See The Adventure of Sudsakorn) 9. (?) The film was successfully distributed domestically in a country that is not a major film producing country, and was produced by that country's equivalent of a "major film studio." Articles on such a film should assert that the film in question was notable for something more than merely having been produced, and if any document can be found to support this, in any language, it should be cited.Leticja (talk) 12:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems to me articles not meeting this criteria.
 * Keep Wrota Europy as the recipient of three Polish Film Awards. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Syzyfowe prace (film) shouldn't be bundled in the same nomination because its notability is completely independent from that of Wrota Europy. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * about Wrota Europy agree, I saw just now, it's my mistake. But Syzyfowe prace, I thing, is suitable for this nomination and not meeting criteria. Leticja (talk) 22:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Wrota Europy, which is the article covered by this nomination. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:41, 23 July 2011 (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.