Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond redemption

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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond redemption[edit]

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

Does not meet WP:NFILM. Majority of sources listed are self-published or WP:Citing IMDb. Drm310 (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 19:36, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 19:36, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A search brought up nothing that would show that it passes NFILM. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alts:

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

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

Temp Delete per being TOO SOON and not (yet) meeting WP:NF. Allow resurrection when inclusion criteria are met. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:36, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Sourcing is far too reliant on IMDb, blogs and other unreliable sources, with no evidence of reliable source coverage shown. The fact that the introduction hinges too strongly on claims about what the film could be billed as doesn't help much, either; for us to claim such a thing in Wikipedia, we would need to find a reliable source which explicitly states that it is that. No prejudice against future recreation if the sourcing can be improved. Bearcat (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nothing more to add than the above editors. Probably a case of WP:TOOSOON. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:48, 30 December 2015 (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.