Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circle Track Summer

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. ^King Jakob _C2 14:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

Circle Track Summer[edit]

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

The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th external links are all dead links. I couldn't find any significant coverage. Fails WP:NF. SL93 (talk) 04:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deadlinks have been addressed. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:52, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you point me to so fix it? That page is only about editors who feel like doing something, but are afraid too. It isn't my job anyway as an unpaid volunteer who gets no appreciation. SL93 (talk) 01:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not "pointing" you... but was rather pointing for others who might stop by to indicate that I feel your concerns for deadlinks have been addressed through regular editing. And speaking for myself, I appreciate you quite a bit... and have done so for years. I can hardly wait for you to go for the mop. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:26, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is a scary process. SL93 (talk) 03:33, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 13:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 13:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is quite a small film. I was able to find this if anyone wants to give a listen. The film is also mentioned in a few articles in Akron Beacon Journal (not available online), but none of these mentions are significant enough. I'm leaning toward deletion per WP:GNG but would like to see what others can find. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per just pushing up on WP:NF. Please compare What was nominated to the improved version. Through the Wayback Machine I found screen-shots of the defunct "official website" which led me to independent sources speaking about this film.[1] I am "weak" due to the coverage being as local as is the film. Perhaps someone will find DVD reviews now that DVD has have given it a wider audience? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 04:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since the film appears notable on a local level. I could not find any guidelines that said a topic was not notable if the coverage was too local, and I feel like there is enough here. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:40, 5 July 2013 (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.