434:. I didn't suggest it needed nation-wide coverage but I'm not even sure we could get to "state-wide" coverage with what we have so far. The vast majority of it is published in the valley itself. Some of the authors are on a first-name basis with the organiser. Independence issues aside, how does coverage from "the guy around the corner" demonstrate that this is a notable festival among a wider readership? Some of that isn't even about the festival - it's university news about a film to be shown at the festival based on (it seems) a press release.
486:
office in the same street is preferable, yes? Otherwise every local street party, farmers market, school carnival, church fete and trade show should get a gig. It obviously doesn't work that way and the line in the sand had always been the extent to which something has received attention from beyond it's local area demonstrating notability among the wider community. It's the principle behind
558:
the word "international". That article has even fewer references than this one (and so will possibly be nominated next). But my point is that I could add the word "international" to anything I do but that wouldn't make it notable. I wouldn't be opposed to incubation but the festival ran for 15 years
485:
has, for a long time, been a factor in notability. My local farmers market gets coverage in my local paper every month. It even gets a mention in our area's neighbourhood watch newsletter. Again, nobody is suggesting "world-wide" coverage but coverage from someone other than the local paper with an
770:
consider this a notable festival. Not every festival or its award receives this kind of coverage. Local sources can be used to fill in the particulars about history and founders. If nobody else bothers, I'll see about trying to remember to fix up the article, but I've already got three or four
635:
And being international doesn't prove that it is notable, either; all I said was that the word "kinda disproves" the "too local" theory. The above discussion implies that sources are only available from
Temecula Valley, which isn't a populated place. In contrast, the article makes the claim that
519:
We shouldn't keep an unsourced article in mainspace, but the "What links here" shows that this is a valuable topic for the encyclopedia. IMO it is an interesting topic, from a interesting locale of the U.S. The title has the word "International", which kinda disproves the "too local" theory. A
616:
checks and found plenty of sources from state-wide and nation-wide media - more than enough to substantiate notability. I've realised its actually a good analogy for this subject. A "local" festival that has gained genuinely international recognition and the coverage to go along with it.
164:
364:. The article does not even state what city the festival is held in. These small venue festivals have proliferated over the years. Some cease almost as quickly as the began. Some grow and become deserving of an article. This one does not.
393:
278:
Mention of cancelation in the local paper does not prove something is notable. If we had articles on every festival that ever had an article in the local paper, this would flood
Knowledge (XXG) with articles on minor, short-lived
590:
199:
reference I could find was from a local newspaper which acknowledged the festival had been cancelled in 2012 due to budget issues and suggested the organisers might try to bring it back in
September 2014.
90:
85:
94:
158:
77:
387:
456:
are what they are, and we do not expect world-wide coverage for any topic, as long as we do have coverage that can al ow creation of an article that serves our readers by providing
124:
249:
297:
117:
253:
245:
612:
It's not a matter of "other stuff" to say that we expect coverage from beyond an event/organisations (very) local area. In the case of Byron Bay I conducted the usual
81:
337:
740:
317:
73:
65:
179:
146:
430:
No, no - I found those too. "Coverage", perhaps, but I can't see how coverage in multiple (very) local publications could possibly allow this to pass
464:, but simply to address someone up above saying the "article does not even state what city the festival is held in"... an addressable issue. Thanks.
780:
719:
679:
645:
630:
607:
572:
529:
503:
476:
447:
421:
389:
372:
349:
329:
309:
288:
269:
240:
59:
551:
140:
395:
136:
744:
17:
223:
This AFD nomination has its roots in two others where proponents suggested that winning at award at this festival substantiated the
186:
636:
films from 20 countries have been screened. Given the implied wide reach of the sources from this valley, they may be enough.
582:
481:
Though it applies to organisations (and though these are community organisations and the events they run), consideration of
674:
543:
391:
152:
763:. Many of these articles are short or focus on awards awarded by the festival, but they demonstrate that high-profile,
799:
40:
592:
457:
776:
641:
604:
525:
473:
418:
284:
748:
550:) would be a blue link because it deemed itself "international" in scope. We already have an article for the
756:
487:
361:
752:
520:
notice of cancellation adds to WP:GNG notability. An event that runs for 15 years is not "short lived".
795:
772:
623:
565:
496:
440:
262:
233:
56:
36:
547:
637:
597:
521:
466:
411:
280:
760:
205:
201:
369:
172:
732:
689:
613:
736:
217:
669:
539:
345:
325:
305:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
794:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
589:, but it's been going on for 10 years and is getting coverage where it is and for what it is.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
712:
618:
560:
491:
435:
257:
228:
764:
578:
559:
without generating enough non-local coverage - what suggests a few more months would help?
482:
431:
406:
381:
213:
209:
767:
453:
380:. Unlike the nom, I was able to find additional coverage, allowing this topic to push at
397:
365:
461:
224:
208:
applies but I can't find any other significant coverage that might allow this to meet
399:
664:
341:
321:
301:
248:
is the only source I was able to find. And these are two related AFD discussions:
111:
705:
692:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
401:. I do not expect this to have world-wide coverage, nor even be covered in
554:
which redirects to the festival's old name. They changed it in 2008 to
385:
460:. But yes, a couple of the other links were thrown in not to support
788:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
107:
103:
99:
171:
699:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
185:
490:and myriad other essays, guidelines and policies.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
802:). No further edits should be made to this page.
298:list of California-related deletion discussions
195:A local film festival without references. The
8:
663:. References provided. Noted. Notable. --
336:Note: This debate has been included in the
316:Note: This debate has been included in the
296:Note: This debate has been included in the
771:articles queued up for a complete rewrite.
338:list of Events-related deletion discussions
74:Temecula Valley International Film Festival
66:Temecula Valley International Film Festival
335:
315:
295:
318:list of Film-related deletion discussions
216:and as an event it wouldn't seem to meet
585:. It may not itself it get coverage in
581:, it may be time for an article on the
212:. As an organisation, it doesn't meet
552:Byron Bay International Film Festival
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
583:Armidale International Film Festival
544:Armidale International Film Festival
227:of a short film and its director.
24:
735:Google search, like the custom
1:
739:search. There are hits from
54:(Non-administrator closure.)
819:
781:01:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
720:01:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
680:02:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
646:07:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
631:07:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
608:07:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
573:06:41, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
530:05:38, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
504:07:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
477:07:01, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
448:10:27, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
422:08:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
373:04:33, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
350:00:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
330:00:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
310:00:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
289:23:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
270:00:12, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
241:23:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
60:03:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
791:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
757:The Hollywood Reporter
753:The Hollywood Reporter
749:The Hollywood Reporter
538:Not unfair, but (I'm
731:. We need a custom
542:) by that logic the
458:content and context
202:Crystal ball gazing
587:The New York Times
403:The New York Times
722:
703:
593:WP:CONTEXTMATTERS
352:
332:
312:
281:John Pack Lambert
55:
810:
793:
773:NinjaRobotPirate
768:reliable sources
717:
710:
701:
698:
694:
677:
672:
667:
627:
600:
569:
500:
469:
454:reliable sources
444:
414:
266:
237:
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
53:
48:The result was
34:
818:
817:
813:
812:
811:
809:
808:
807:
806:
800:deletion review
789:
713:
706:
687:
675:
670:
665:
638:Unscintillating
625:
598:
577:To answer your
567:
522:Unscintillating
498:
467:
442:
412:
264:
235:
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
816:
814:
805:
804:
784:
783:
725:
724:
723:
696:
695:
684:
683:
682:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
650:
649:
648:
533:
532:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
425:
424:
375:
360:Does not meet
354:
353:
333:
313:
292:
291:
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
815:
803:
801:
797:
792:
786:
785:
782:
778:
774:
769:
766:
762:
758:
754:
750:
746:
742:
741:Dread Central
738:
734:
730:
727:
726:
721:
718:
716:
711:
709:
704:
697:
693:
691:
686:
685:
681:
678:
673:
668:
662:
659:
658:
647:
643:
639:
634:
633:
632:
629:
628:
622:
621:
615:
611:
610:
609:
606:
605:
602:
601:
594:
591:
588:
584:
580:
576:
575:
574:
571:
570:
564:
563:
557:
553:
549:
545:
541:
537:
536:
535:
534:
531:
527:
523:
518:
515:
514:
505:
502:
501:
495:
494:
489:
488:WP:GARAGEBAND
484:
480:
479:
478:
475:
474:
471:
470:
463:
459:
455:
451:
450:
449:
446:
445:
439:
438:
433:
429:
428:
427:
426:
423:
420:
419:
416:
415:
408:
404:
400:
398:
396:
394:
392:
390:
388:
386:
383:
379:
376:
374:
371:
367:
363:
362:WP:NOTABILITY
359:
356:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
314:
311:
307:
303:
299:
294:
293:
290:
286:
282:
277:
274:
273:
272:
271:
268:
267:
261:
260:
255:
251:
247:
243:
242:
239:
238:
232:
231:
226:
221:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
198:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
790:
787:
745:Screen Daily
728:
714:
707:
700:
688:
660:
624:
619:
603:
596:
586:
566:
561:
555:
516:
497:
492:
472:
465:
452:Independent
441:
436:
417:
410:
407:has coverage
402:
377:
357:
275:
263:
258:
244:
234:
229:
222:
196:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
57:NorthAmerica
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
595:. Thanks.
159:free images
540:Australian
279:festivals.
225:notability
206:WP:NOTTEMP
796:talk page
765:non-local
733:WP:FILM/R
702:→ Call me
614:WP:BEFORE
599:Schmidt,
468:Schmidt,
413:Schmidt,
405:, but it
366:MarnetteD
342:• Gene93k
322:• Gene93k
302:• Gene93k
220:either.
37:talk page
798:or in a
737:WP:VG/RS
690:Relisted
620:Stalwart
562:Stalwart
517:Incubate
493:Stalwart
483:audience
437:Stalwart
259:Stalwart
230:Stalwart
218:WP:EVENT
118:View log
39:or in a
761:Variety
556:include
204:aside,
165:WP refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
759:, and
579:WP:WAX
432:WP:GNG
382:WP:GNG
358:Delete
276:Delete
214:WP:ORG
210:WP:GNG
137:Google
95:delete
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
777:talk
729:Keep
708:Hahc
661:Keep
642:talk
548:link
526:talk
462:WP:N
378:Keep
370:Talk
346:talk
326:talk
306:talk
285:talk
252:and
246:This
197:only
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
671:ncr
626:111
568:111
499:111
443:111
409:.
265:111
236:111
187:TWL
116:– (
779:)
755:,
751:,
747:,
743:,
715:21
676:am
666:do
644:)
528:)
368:|
348:)
340:.
328:)
320:.
308:)
300:.
287:)
256:.
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
52:.
775:(
640:(
546:(
524:(
384:.
344:(
324:(
304:(
283:(
254:2
250:1
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.