Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wanksy

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. Jenks24 (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wanksy[edit]

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

Based on a short film by student film makers. No indication of WP:notability. noq (talk) 13:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support this almost makes me regret opposing the extension of A7 to films. But yes this is not yet notable, might be worth restoring if it actually wins an award. Ϣere SpielChequers 13:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WereSpielChequers. Not notable. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per failing WP:NF. Brand new article writen by a 2-edit-ever new contributor[1] who may think that Wikipedia is the place to share a film created for the New Zealand's version of a 48-Hour Film Festival.[2] Short films have difficulty becoming notable, and those scripted, shot, and edited in only two days have greater difficulties than most. After a bit of effort it's looking prettier now,[3] but the best that might be said is this article is simply TOO SOON. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:21, 23 May 2012 (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.