Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas at Cartwright's

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 keep. Daniel (talk) 05:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas at Cartwright's[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 meet WP:NF or WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage by independent sources BOVINEBOY2008 22:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you are on a campaign to delete Hallmark movies, which is a shame. This movie has; External links Christmas at Cartwright's at IMDb Christmas at Cartwright's at AllMovie Christmas at Cartwright's at the TCM Movie Database Official website

Well documented with external sources. Stop this vengeance against Hallmark. keep the movie.Savolya (talk) 12:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In all fairness, most Hallmark movies rarely get coverage beyond a brief mention in passing of TV lineups. I absolutely adore Hallmark movies, but the sheer volume with which they're created and released makes it fairly impossible for all of them to get enough coverage to justify inclusion. I'd say that about 2-10% of them actually gain the needed coverage. There's just too many of them for outlets to really cover, as covering them would take away time and space needed to cover other films and people. It's kind of the nature of the beast with film coverage as a whole, but particularly when it comes to anything that isn't a top tier mainstream film like say, anything in the MCU or by Nicholas Sparks. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Reader. I have no issue with Hallmark movies, or tv movies in general. However, beyond the basic credits/stats and a plot summary, there is no encyclopedic information from most of these articles. Wikipedia is not just a database of every topic that has ever existed. Each article needs to meet a notability threshold, usually indicated by coverage from significant independent coverage. I would also argue that being included on a list of "Films to rewatch" or "Most popular movies" does not constitute significant coverage, especially such lists criteria are unclear and inclusion is again just a short synopsis. BOVINEBOY2008 10:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Review at Dove.org and several sites listing it as a top Hallmark film (including Parade Magazine). Donaldd23 (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has reliable sources coverage such as Dove and CinemaBlend, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 02:47, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Clearly notable and the sources are reliable. - Ret.Prof (talk) 16:39, 18 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.