457:". They are not themselves notability criteria. They advise that if the listed circumstances exist, one might likely expect to find RS... they do not instruct that lack of meeting the guiding attributes ipso-facto means that one will cannot and will not find reliable sources. I hate that Knowledge (XXG) is being more and more couched in confusing overlays of verbiage, when a simple sentence might say it all. Consensus and multiple discussions has agreed that W:NF's general principles pretty much advise "if some of the following circumstances exist, you should be able to find sources". Following the guideline of
389:
You are absolutely right. However you failed to point out that the guidelines also state "... The following are attributes that generally indicate, when supported with reliable sources, that the required sources are likely to exist:The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews
414:..The film is "taught" as a subject at an accredited university or college with a notable film program. " If you can point me to any one of the 4 criteria, I am more than happy to reconsider, but I can not find them. Thanks.
390:
by two or more nationally known critics. The film is historically notable, as evidenced by one or more of the following: Publication of at least two non-trivial articles, at least five years after the film's initial release.
169:
570:
581:
one source to help out that reception section some more) and kudos to the nominator for being open-minded enough to switch stances upon evaluation of the improvements. Sincerely, --
130:
558:
443:
If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.
394:.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.
163:
540:, there are several notable sources in this article now. I respect the nominator, SebastianHelm, for changing his mind and deciding not to delete. That is very respectable.
306:
just came out, two just listings of the time it will be playing at the local theater and finally two quick reviews in a foreign news paper. This does not meet our
213:
201:
97:
92:
257:
The article has now been expanded and sourced. I found numerous reviews of the film and all reviewers agree that it is a piece of crap... but even
101:
234:
Yup.... quite a poor beginning. However, A quick search has conviced me, that poor as it is at the moment, there is enough available so that the
361:
With respects, Google News is not the only place one might find in-depth articles in genre-specific reliable sources that show a film meeting
84:
63:
17:
184:
151:
300:
600:
36:
145:
585:
549:
511:
486:
428:
378:
356:
326:
286:
270:
247:
222:
398:.The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release.
482:
374:
266:
243:
141:
88:
574:
238:. As I have some time today, I will do just that. I'll be back in a couple hours or so with a progress report.
599:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
279:
191:
59:
577:, we are in part a collection of what appears in specialized encyclopedias. So, good work Michael (I have
307:
200:
Unspeedying deletion. Was incorrectly tagged as A1. It's a terrible start for an article, but it does have
51:
235:
478:
402:.The film was featured as part of a documentary, program, or retrospective on the history of cinema.
370:
262:
239:
80:
72:
416:
344:
314:
177:
157:
283:
219:
55:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
470:
366:
566:
466:
458:
446:
434:
362:
500:
This article has gone through significant improvements since it was put up for deletion.
545:
507:
562:
474:
582:
334:- Struck delete and moved to keep based on the work doe. Nice job by the way, and
118:
406:.The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking.
369:. But thank you for showing the way to even more than are in the article. Best,
296:
439:
As with all subjects, a film should satisfy the general notability guideline.
541:
527:
503:
46:
Article has been substantially improved; there are no more delete votes.
537:
523:
453:
are simply criteria for determining when or if one might expect that "
445:" I am hard pressed to understand how you see the provided in-depth
302:
give 6 listings. One a brief review, one a Press release that the
258:
593:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
410:.The film was selected for preservation in a national archive.
339:
303:
526:
page(s), which are related to this deletion discussion.
578:
501:
125:
114:
110:
106:
569:. Moreover subject is indeed covered in at least one
176:
190:
557:due to improvements and as film does get over 40
310:unless they changed drastically recently. Thanks
204:that show that it has some marginal notability.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
603:). No further edits should be made to this page.
449:as somehow failing to meet the GNG. The quoted
261:can have the coverage needed to meet the GNG.
522:: This debate has been included on the and
8:
518:
208:
214:list of Film-related deletion discussions
455:the required sources are likely to exist
212:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
433:Ahh... as I'm sure you've read, the
24:
536:In the alternative, redirect to
236:article can be markedly improved
1:
586:21:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
550:20:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
512:20:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
487:19:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
429:08:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
379:08:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
357:23:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
327:06:17, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
287:03:26, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
271:03:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
248:01:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
223:23:17, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
620:
498:Note to closing nominator
280:MichaelQSchmidt's message
596:Please do not modify it.
437:guideline begins wiith "
32:Please do not modify it.
441:" which itself states "
571:published encyclopedia
463:the required sources
308:notability standards
295:- The only hits, at
81:Munchie Strikes Back
73:Munchie Strikes Back
530:
217:
68:
54:comment added by
611:
598:
567:reliable sources
447:reliable sources
427:
355:
325:
195:
194:
180:
128:
122:
104:
67:
48:
44:The result was
34:
619:
618:
614:
613:
612:
610:
609:
608:
607:
601:deletion review
594:
479:MichaelQSchmidt
415:
371:MichaelQSchmidt
343:
313:
263:MichaelQSchmidt
240:MichaelQSchmidt
137:
124:
95:
79:
76:
49:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
617:
615:
606:
605:
589:
588:
561:hits, i.e. is
552:
531:
516:
514:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
384:
383:
382:
381:
329:
299:as shown here
289:
273:
252:
251:
250:
226:
225:
198:
197:
134:
75:
70:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
616:
604:
602:
597:
591:
590:
587:
584:
580:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
556:
553:
551:
547:
543:
539:
535:
532:
529:
525:
521:
517:
515:
513:
509:
505:
502:
499:
496:
495:
488:
484:
480:
477:. Thank you.
476:
472:
468:
465:"... meeting
464:
460:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
436:
432:
431:
430:
426:
425:
422:
419:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
388:
387:
386:
385:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
360:
359:
358:
354:
353:
350:
347:
341:
338:my word (yes
337:
333:
330:
328:
324:
323:
320:
317:
311:
309:
305:
301:
298:
294:
290:
288:
285:
281:
277:
274:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
230:
229:
228:
227:
224:
221:
215:
211:
207:
206:
205:
203:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
132:
127:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:
74:
71:
69:
65:
61:
57:
56:SebastianHelm
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
595:
592:
575:First pillar
573:and per our
559:Google Books
554:
533:
519:
497:
473:, and thus
462:
454:
450:
442:
438:
423:
420:
417:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
351:
348:
345:
342:intended).
335:
331:
321:
318:
315:
292:
291:
275:
254:
231:
209:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
50:— Preceding
45:
43:
31:
28:
534:Strong keep
461:, I found "
297:Google News
164:free images
563:verifiable
451:attributes
202:some links
528:User:Ikip
284:Sebastian
220:Sebastian
583:A Nobody
565:through
131:View log
64:contribs
52:unsigned
538:Munchie
524:Munchie
336:Keeping
232:Comment
170:WP refs
158:scholar
98:protect
93:history
471:WP:GNG
421:hoesss
367:WP:GNG
349:hoesss
319:hoesss
293:Delete
142:Google
126:delete
102:delete
579:added
467:WP:NF
459:WP:NF
435:WP:NF
363:WP:NF
185:JSTOR
146:books
129:) – (
119:views
111:watch
107:links
16:<
555:Keep
546:talk
542:Ikip
520:Note
508:talk
504:Ikip
483:talk
475:WP:N
375:talk
365:and
332:Keep
282:. —
278:per
276:Keep
267:talk
259:crap
255:Keep
244:talk
210:Note
178:FENS
152:news
115:logs
89:talk
85:edit
60:talk
340:Pun
304:DVD
192:TWL
548:)
510:)
485:)
469:,
377:)
312:.
269:)
246:)
218:—
216:.
172:)
117:|
113:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
66:)
62:•
544:(
506:(
481:(
424:S
418:S
412:6
408:5
404:4
400:3
396:2
392:1
373:(
352:S
346:S
322:S
316:S
265:(
242:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
123:(
121:)
83:(
58:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.