31:
160:
as per G11 and A7, but anon user has removed the tag more than once (instead of using "hangon"). Started by promo-banned username, which is apparently the same anon user. This has no reliable sources, no claim of notability, its direct-to-dvd via Amazon.com. This is obviously intended to be used as a
390:
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
478:
checked to see if Amazon is considered worldide distribution or if this guieline as applied to major blockbusters is to be aplied the same way to small independent film which cannot possibly meet their distribution bankrole?
149:
758:: sufficient citations/notability is included. historically important b/c what is listed in Plot section. lso historically important from a South Asian American film perspective.--
422:
This is basically a commercial effort trying to use wikipedia as an advertising platform. However, a convincing argument of meeting any of the above criteria will make me reflect.--
307:
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.
415:
An article on the film should be created only if there is enough information on it that it would clutter up the biography page of that person if it was mentioned there.
40:
403:
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.
181:
701:: per Davewild. It doesn't appear to be blatant advertisement or spam. While not widespread notability, agree with Schmidt that it may barely meet some of
741:: only one of the references is independently talking about the movie. All the others are press releases, film's website, composer's website, etc.--
531:
considered that a new release could not possibly have a survey by critics five years after its release, since it is not 5 years in the future? OR
571:
consider that a new film still making the festival circuits has not been out long enough to find all the places that might give it awards? OR
83:
17:
800:
543:
considered that a newly released film could not possibly be screened at a festival five years after its release as it is a
782:
65:
46:
226:. I will myself have a hand at removing author's COI, POV and ADVERT to bring it into line with policy and guideline.
559:
Consider that a new film could not and would not be used in any kind of "retrospective on the history of cinema"? OR
708:
667:
519:
stopped to consider that a film only months old could not possibly have an article 5 years after it's release? OR
319:
The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release.
235:
116:
111:
781:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
120:
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
763:
746:
271:
The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics.
103:
81:
759:
295:
Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release.
687:
660:
460:
Wow. What a colorful way to make sure your every word is emphsized at an AfD discussion. Almost like
367:
The film is "taught" as a subject at an accredited university or college with a notable film program.
228:
648:
619:
Consider that the secondary criteria are SECONDARY criteria that indicate special circumstances? OR
507:
checked to see if a new release independent film had to immediately become historically notable? OR
331:
The film was featured as part of a documentary, program, or retrospective on the history of cinema.
210:
742:
445:
427:
192:
166:
607:
Consider that a new film is not expected to yet meet the guidelines intended for older films? OR
495:
or were considered a reliable sources offered by individuals qualified to voice such opinion? OR
767:
750:
733:
691:
672:
449:
431:
240:
214:
196:
170:
85:
78:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
644:
595:
Consider that a new film has not been out long enough to be picked up and taught anywhere? OR
718:
637:
625:
613:
601:
589:
577:
565:
553:
537:
525:
513:
501:
485:
472:
409:
397:
384:
361:
349:
337:
325:
313:
301:
289:
277:
265:
683:
702:
492:
252:
223:
729:
206:
248:
794:
583:
Consider that a new film is unlikely to be preserved anywhere until it gets older? OR
491:
see if the in-depth review or interviews souced in the article met the guidelines of
441:
423:
188:
162:
137:
343:
The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.[
283:
The film is historically notable, as evidenced by one or more of the following:
464:
This is a nice parlor trick. Like if I were to reply toward your statements...
107:
247:
Care to explain what of the criteria it meets? It doesn't meet the principal
725:
631:
considered that inappropriate arguments out of context is not helpful? OR
99:
91:
775:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
25:
355:
The film was selected for preservation in a national archive.
705:
such as worldwide DVD release and reviews by local media.
161:
promotional campaign. A total misuse of
Knowledge (XXG).
144:
133:
129:
125:
462:
Making every sentence bold so no one could miss it.
440:BTW, an anon IP reverted your sensible changes.--
68:). No further edits should be made to this page.
785:). No further edits should be made to this page.
714:simply because of nominators obnoxious use of
8:
643:point out that the film did also not meet
176:
182:list of Film-related deletion discussions
682:: no significant widespread notability.
180:: This debate has been included in the
45:For an explanation of the process, see
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
656:OR SHOULD I USE BOLD FOR EMPAHASIS?
41:deletion review on 2009 February 28
24:
29:
222:as just barely, barely meeting
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
1:
768:12:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
751:23:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
734:08:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
692:03:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
673:06:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
654:Yes... wonderfully colorful.
450:07:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
432:07:44, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
241:18:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
215:15:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
197:07:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
171:07:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
86:01:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
817:
374:Secondary criteria for NF:
251:criteria, and in terms of
709:File:Symbol_confirmed.svg
801:Pages at deletion review
778:Please do not modify it.
61:Please do not modify it.
205:as per nominator.
73:The result was
199:
185:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
808:
780:
724:{{tl|notdone}}.
723:
717:
663:
642:
636:
630:
624:
618:
612:
606:
600:
594:
588:
582:
576:
570:
564:
558:
552:
542:
536:
530:
524:
518:
512:
506:
500:
490:
484:
477:
471:
414:
408:
402:
396:
389:
383:
366:
360:
354:
348:
342:
336:
330:
324:
318:
312:
306:
300:
294:
288:
282:
276:
270:
264:
231:
186:
147:
141:
123:
63:
33:
32:
26:
816:
815:
811:
810:
809:
807:
806:
805:
791:
790:
789:
783:deletion review
776:
721:
715:
661:
640:
634:
628:
622:
616:
610:
604:
598:
592:
586:
580:
574:
568:
562:
556:
550:
540:
534:
528:
522:
516:
510:
504:
498:
488:
482:
475:
469:
412:
406:
400:
394:
387:
381:
364:
358:
352:
346:
340:
334:
328:
322:
316:
310:
304:
298:
292:
286:
280:
274:
268:
262:
255:I don't see it:
229:
143:
114:
98:
95:
66:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
814:
812:
804:
803:
793:
792:
788:
787:
771:
770:
753:
736:
706:
695:
694:
676:
675:
652:
632:
620:
608:
596:
584:
572:
560:
548:
532:
520:
508:
496:
480:
467:
466:
465:
455:
454:
453:
452:
435:
434:
419:
418:
417:
416:
404:
392:
376:
375:
371:
370:
369:
368:
356:
344:
332:
320:
308:
296:
284:
272:
257:
256:
244:
243:
217:
200:
154:
153:
94:
89:
71:
70:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
813:
802:
799:
798:
796:
786:
784:
779:
773:
772:
769:
765:
761:
757:
754:
752:
748:
744:
743:SarekOfVulcan
740:
737:
735:
731:
727:
720:
713:
710:
707:
704:
700:
697:
696:
693:
689:
685:
681:
678:
677:
674:
671:
670:
669:
665:
664:
657:
653:
650:
646:
639:
633:
627:
621:
615:
609:
603:
597:
591:
585:
579:
573:
567:
561:
555:
549:
546:
539:
533:
527:
521:
515:
509:
503:
497:
494:
487:
481:
474:
468:
463:
459:
458:
457:
456:
451:
447:
443:
439:
438:
437:
436:
433:
429:
425:
421:
420:
411:
405:
399:
393:
386:
380:
379:
378:
377:
373:
372:
363:
357:
351:
345:
339:
333:
327:
321:
315:
309:
303:
297:
291:
285:
279:
273:
267:
261:
260:
259:
258:
254:
250:
246:
245:
242:
239:
238:
237:
233:
232:
225:
221:
218:
216:
212:
208:
204:
201:
198:
194:
190:
183:
179:
175:
174:
173:
172:
168:
164:
159:
158:speedy delete
151:
146:
139:
135:
131:
127:
122:
118:
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
96:
93:
90:
88:
87:
84:
82:
80:
76:
69:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
777:
774:
760:solofanindia
755:
738:
711:
698:
679:
668:
666:
659:
655:
544:
461:
236:
234:
227:
219:
202:
177:
157:
155:
79:Juliancolton
75:no consensus
74:
72:
60:
57:
36:
712:Strong keep
684:JamesBurns
649:WP:ATHLETE
391:Thailand".
156:This is a
220:Weak Keep
207:Edward321
795:Category
662:Schmidt,
547:film? OR
442:Cerejota
424:Cerejota
230:Schmidt,
189:Cerejota
163:Cerejota
150:View log
719:notdone
645:WP:BOOK
638:notdone
626:notdone
614:notdone
602:notdone
590:notdone
578:notdone
566:notdone
554:notdone
538:notdone
526:notdone
514:notdone
502:notdone
486:notdone
473:notdone
410:notdone
398:notdone
385:notdone
362:notdone
350:notdone
338:notdone
326:notdone
314:notdone
302:notdone
290:notdone
278:notdone
266:notdone
117:protect
112:history
739:Delete
680:Delete
203:Delete
145:delete
121:delete
703:WP:NF
493:WP:NF
253:WP:NF
224:WP:NF
148:) – (
138:views
130:watch
126:links
100:Aduri
92:Aduri
16:<
764:talk
756:Keep
747:talk
730:talk
726:Ikip
699:Keep
688:talk
446:talk
428:talk
249:WP:N
211:talk
193:talk
178:Note
167:talk
134:logs
108:talk
104:edit
647:or
545:NEW
187:--
77:. –
797::
766:)
749:)
732:)
722:}}
716:{{
690:)
658:.
641:}}
635:{{
629:}}
623:{{
617:}}
611:{{
605:}}
599:{{
593:}}
587:{{
581:}}
575:{{
569:}}
563:{{
557:}}
551:{{
541:}}
535:{{
529:}}
523:{{
517:}}
511:{{
505:}}
499:{{
489:}}
483:{{
479:OR
476:}}
470:{{
448:)
430:)
413:}}
407:{{
401:}}
395:{{
388:}}
382:{{
365:}}
359:{{
353:}}
347:{{
341:}}
335:{{
329:}}
323:{{
317:}}
311:{{
305:}}
299:{{
293:}}
287:{{
281:}}
275:{{
269:}}
263:{{
213:)
195:)
184:.
169:)
136:|
132:|
128:|
124:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
43:.
762:(
745:(
728:(
686:(
651:?
444:(
426:(
209:(
191:(
165:(
152:)
142:(
140:)
102:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.