Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fisherman's Granddaughter

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. (non-admin closure) Dps04 (talk) 04:48, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Fisherman's Granddaughter[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)

This film has 2 citations, but another editor thinks they aren't enough to support notability. Thoughts? Donaldd23 (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 03:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I guess. I tracked down one of the two reviews cited and found another. (If anyone can find the New York Dramatic Mirror ref, that'd be appreciated, because I couldn't find it online.) These reviews may not strictly satisfy WP:NFILM #1, but I think it'd be a shame for historic preservation purposes if we deleted this article on a more-than-century-old film just for lack of technical compliance with a guideline. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 04:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Two+ reviews, especially that early in the silent film era, satisfy WP:NFSOURCES. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found the review in the New York Dramatic Mirror which is of course public domain and available through Google Books. The review begins "A simple story, but well told, with good expression and heart interest, is presented in this picture." We should try really hard to save articles about films that are 110 years old. In this case, the director and the studio are both notable, and the film was reviewed in at least three publications. I will expand the article after work today. Two of the three reviews were positive, and I will add a plot summary. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per above, it is important to have some examples of silent films. Historicity and the research given here satisfies WP:NFSOURCES. -- Whiteguru (talk) 11:59, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added a plot summary and additional critical commentary. The article now has links to reviews from three reliable sources of the era. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:04, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Passes GNG.★Trekker (talk) 08:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources including three film reviews so passes WP:NFILM and WP:GNG imv, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:03, 21 September 2020 (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.