Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pros & Cons

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:01, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pros & Cons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:NFO and WP:NFSOURCES. I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, only newspaper listings on Newspapers.com and nothing suitable or reliable enough to pass WP:NEXIST in a WP:BEFORE. The Film Creator (talk) 17:06, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. I was able to find one independent review in an offline reference, and an entry in a reference work on a filmography of the African diaspora. See below.4meter4 (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
C. Edward Wall (2002). "Pros & Cons". Media Review Digest. Vol. 32. Pierian Press. p. 376.
Audrey Thomas McCluskey, ed. (2007). "Pros & Cons". Frame by Frame III: A Filmography of the African Diasporan Image, 1994-2004. Indiana University Press. p. 585. ISBN 9780253348296.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 22:56, 26 June 2022 (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.