Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Nutcracker Christmas

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. Randykitty (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Nutcracker Christmas[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable television film, does not have significant coverage by independent reliable sources, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 12:34, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree OswaldClara (talk) 16:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:29, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Was nominated for Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directing – Children's Programs in 2016. Donaldd23 (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. We only have so much time in life so I don't understand why some people choose to spend all of their time on Wikipedia contemptuously destroying other people's work instead of doing something productive. --Nicholas0 (talk) 01:39, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please give a reason for keeping? Because this is not one. BOVINEBOY2008 01:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With that logic we should scrap AfD and the PROD and CSD processes. Deletion is a necessary evil. SK2242 (talk) 19:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Donaldd23. matt91486 (talk) 23:27, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (Behalten) In Germany darf jeder Film einen Artikel haben, sobald er gesendet wurde. Ich schreibe übrigens gerade an der deutschen Version! VG --Goldmull (talk) 20:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and improve. Establishes notability through awards and additional reception. Archrogue (talk) 21:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The formatting and arguments of this discussion has me cracking up. Geschichte (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The arguments are all quite weak. More discussion is required.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Michael Lembeck#Film - The most notable thing about the film is that it was nominated, but did not win, an award. Aside from that, the coverage is actually pretty weak. For example, both of the "reviews" being used in the reception section are nothing more than a couple sentence summaries of the plot and a score. I tried looking for some additional, more in-depth reviews in reliable sources, and wasn't able to find anything - the best I could come up with is this entry in a Listicle. The director, however, is notable, and the film and information on its nomination for the award, which again appears to be the only remotely notable thing about it, is already described there, so Redirecting there should be adequate. Rorshacma (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This discussion is not very productive. !Voting "keep" because "We only have so much time in life" is plain silly. !Voting in German is not very courteous on the English WP and, in addition, it is absolutely irrelevant what other wikis find notable or not. Being nominated (but not winning) for an award does not appear to be enough to establish notability. At this point, the one !vote for redirection appears to be the most solid one. Relisting one more time in the hope some more serious discussion will ensue.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 17:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Awards, themselves, do not confer notability. They may be used to presume notability but you run the risk of it coming to AfD and being subjected to the actual notability guideline for ALL of Wikipedia which is WP:N. The nominator is correct in that if the subject does not receive significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent secondary sources then it doesn't matter whether we like something or not, it doesn't belong. That may mean we have all wasted a lot of time here but that's the rule of measure we have to go by. Subject doesn't meet this so therefore doesn't belong. If you want to merge or redirect I don't so much care but it doesn't warrant a stand alone article. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 18:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing in any actual reliable sources. Fails GNG. SK2242 (talk) 19:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence of notability. Not even notable actors involved. I’m sorry people get their feelings hurt about deletion but the best advice is to save it in your iPhone notes or a Word document in case you have reason to revisit it. 🤷‍♀️ Trillfendi (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.