Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bird in a Cage

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 no consensus. leaning towards Keep. -- Cirt (talk) 00:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bird in a Cage[edit]

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

This is a 1986 student film that received a 1987 Student Academy Award (originally the text simply stated "Academy Award winning"). Note on the page for the award, very few are wikilinked as very few are notable. It did receive a short review in the All Movie Guide (originally the text stated The New York Times). This film lacks sufficient notability (beyond a rightful mention on the award page) to deserve a separate article. This page was created simultaneously with the director Antonio Zarro whose page I will be AFDing next. His page purported (before my editing) [1] that he is an Academy Award winning producer of 300 films that have played in Hollywood, Cannes, Showtime, HBO, etc. His short IMDB page supports none of this besides some bit parts and this film. Apparently he is producing a short in the future. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 02:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This discussion is about the film. The director's article is a different discussion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. When a film wins an Academy Award,page 24 it's notable per "The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking"... even if the event happened 25 years ago. That Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences chooses to recognize the work of young filmmakers does not make that recognition somehow dismissable because the filmmaker is 25 years older. As far better sources exist beyond the one impuned by the nominator,[2] we have a guideline encouraged reason to expand the article and add them, not delete it because it has not been done yet... nor is it a reason to argue that because a different film does not (yet) have an article, this film should not either. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am not sure that a Student Academy Award is considered a "major award" - if it is, the article obviously should be kept. Even if not, it seems to have reviews and articles from several major newspapers (per the link provided by MichaelQSchmidt, which may adequately indicate notability regardless. Rlendog (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My thought toward the award is that since is is given by one of the more notable of the award-giving organizations to recognize excellence in filmmaking, it should not matter that the award is to a film student, as opposed to a non-student. No matter what this organization chooses to call the award itself, the notability is found in who gave it and why. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm inclined to agree that any award bestowed by the Academy confers at least the marginal amount of notability sufficient to merit a standalone article, even if it doesn't have much hope of expanding beyond stub status. — Chromancer^talk/_cont 01:08, 30 August 2010 (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.