Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imelda Trilogy (2nd nomination)

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. Tone 16:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Imelda Trilogy[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)

Article which was soft deleted at AFD due to low participation in the original discussion, then accordingly undeleted on an WP:RFU request by the original creator -- but the creator has not substantively bolstered the case for notability, or even paid any attention at all to the advice they were given about the difference between reliable sources that constitute support for notability and primary sources that do not. The only real media references here are still a minor community hyperlocal that isn't widely distributed enough to singlehandedly vault a topic over WP:GNG all by itself if it's the strongest source on offer, and a Q&A interview in which the filmmaker is speaking about his own work in the first person -- and other than that, the creator has only continued to add bad sources (blogs, podcasts, the self-published catalogues of film festivals) that aren't building notability at all. Again, the notability test for films is not passed just because film festival catalogues offer technical verification that the film was screened there -- it's passed if and when the film has been the subject of media attention (critical reviews, etc.) to show that it's been externally validated as significant, and there still isn't nearly enough real media coverage being shown here. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There are only two references that meet notability for WP:NFILM. There remainder are as per nom, press releases, theatre notices, and first person interviews. Although the maker has done a lot of work over a trilogy, there is insufficient notablility in this article. --Whiteguru (talk) 11:04, 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.