Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Testpaper (2018 film)

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 speedy delete. Speedy deleted by Jimfbleak per CSD G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 13:11, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Testpaper (2018 film)[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)

Fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG; article was sent to draft by User:CommanderWaterford about half an hour ago but returned to main space 4 minutes later with no reliable sources, still. My WP:BEFORE search found nothing. The New Indian Express reference is about a completely different film. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom, fails WP:NFILM and WP:GNG CommanderWaterford (talk) 10:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DENY ——Serial 11:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I saw the page of this movie. In its talk page , it is mentioned that it is under the scope of wikiproject:films and is a stub. So I don't think that I should be deleted. Moreover, this movie is also in the list of IMDb top rated indian short films and that list of IMDb is independent and not user generated.

Please see WP:IMDB. Films with no sources outside of IMDb are almost never kept. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr.spiderone , you have said that the film is not listed on that IMDb list , plz check again , it is on 9th or 10th rank.

No it isn't and it doesn't matter even if it is. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?countries=in&title_type=short&sort=user_rating,desc view this , the list you was viewing was in ascending order , this one is in descending order. And please don't delete this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:4001:81D9:ECE4:283B:B777:447C (talk) 11:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted by user rating with 7 user reviews... How is that notable? Please link me to WP:THREE reliable, independent sources (e.g. newspapers, magazines, independent film review websites) covering this film in depth. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Spielberg's 1964 film firelight's Wikipedia page is also created and that page has absolutely no references , you can see there and still it is there and not deleted. There is also a reference of Movies Fc and Movies Fc is a independent source.Randomcrunchycookie (talk) 11:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By all means put that up for deletion if you want. You still haven't responded to my request to provide WP:THREE reliable, independent, published sources discussing this film in depth Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But there is not even a single reference in that steven Spielberg's firelight's Wikipedia page and still it is there. Therefore I am requesting that please do not delete this pageRandomcrunchycookie (talk) 12:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay so you admit that there aren't WP:THREE reliable, published sources covering this film in depth then? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then what ? please do not delete this page, there are thousands of pages like this which are not deleted .Randomcrunchycookie (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails notability as outlined above. Randomcrunchycookie please have a look at WP:OSE for more about why referring to other sub-standard articles is not a reason for a particular item to be kept. Eagleash (talk) 14:15, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Not even Google recognizes this film being a thing, and the bot will detect any sort of obscure topic you didn't intend to research if you put in the right words. This nomination is not helped by the fact Randomcrunchycookies is making WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments. Getting on an IDMb list of an obscure category with only a few votes from users, even if it is at the top of said list, is not WP:SIGCOV. 👨x🐱 (talk) 14:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable student short film, with user IMdB ratings (which are not WP:RS. Nothing else found to support its inclusion or to pass WP:NFILM. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - utterly fails WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. Might be a COI issue with the article's creator as well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm usually extremely anti-delete but this article was already deleted multiple times under just The Testpaper (redlink) earlier this month. Seems to me that this article doesn't meet Wikipedia standards and there's multiple attempts to get it on the site O_o Gatemansgc (TɅ̊LK) 03:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per ToU, and WP:SALT due to repeated recreation. ——Serial 11:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I tagged per WP:G11 and SP'd the page. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:05, 26 April 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.