Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akuoma

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. JohnCD (talk) 20:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Akuoma[edit]

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

Non notable film with no references. -- Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 08:19, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I found no sources. The article sounds like an advertisement. SL93 (talk) 23:04, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Cannot find any sources which substantiate the claims in the article. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I think it qualifies for WP:CSD#G11. Certainly fails general notability. QU ^TalkQu 10:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for being premature and failing WP:NF. And an aside to User:QuiteUnusual, the article is not so "exclusively promotional" to merit a WP:G11. If or when this film gets coverage, we might welcome it back. I would have sugested userfication to its author, but as the director is Vining Ogu and the article was created by User:Viningogu I have a distinct worry over WP:COI... so I have left him a caution. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree it isn't a G11 now, but I think it was when I first looked at it. Not relevant now anyway - QU ^TalkQu 08:03, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went and cleaned it up some before coming here to opine a delete. Good practice, if nothing else. When a rank newcomer creates an article, they quite often make errors in formatting and style, so I try not to use a first impression to judge a tone or style that could be easily fixed through a little editing. But yes... a moot point as it fails WP:NF. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 09:25, 11 April 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.