Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Valkyrie: Dawn of the 4th Reich

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. Sandstein 07:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Valkyrie: Dawn of the 4th Reich[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)

This article about a film is built on IMDb references. While searching for sources, I have found this piece by IndieWire and a review by a blog called "The War Movie Buff". These are not enough to meet the two professional reviews asked for by WP:NFO. So, I'd say the article should be deleted for failing WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Two more, that still might not be enough to pass GNG: [[1]] and [[2]] Kolma8 (talk) 08:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also here [[3]], [[4]]. Kolma8 (talk) 08:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding these sources. There seem to have been more reviews than I had originally thought. I believe it still doesn't meet the "reviews by two or more nationally known critics". I'd need something that clearly exceeds the level of a blog to say otherwise. Modussiccandi (talk) 09:46, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning to delete -- Such works are a variety of non-history, because they tend to be a fictional account of what the writer wished should happen. Counter-factual studies are a legitimate technique for elucidating why what happened did happen, but plain fiction such as this is not. The simple answer to this is that we cannot have an article on every book or film. This (at present) is merely a synopsis, not even a review or something summarising reviews. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and agree per User:Peterkingiron. Zin Win Hlaing (talk) 10:42, 15 February 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.