Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicago Institute for the Moving Image

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:40, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Institute for the Moving Image[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)

It is an interesting and worthy initiative, but it doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ORG that I could establish. Boleyn (talk) 14:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 14:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 14:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails all forms of WP:N.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:59, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 04:38, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Closeapple (talk) 19:38, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Closeapple (talk) 19:39, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Festival for Cinema of the Deaf and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joshua Flanders --Closeapple (talk) 19:46, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kj cheetham (talk) 16:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   Kadzi   (talk) 20:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My search did not find significant independent coverage that would show WP:GNG is met. Existing is not the same as being notable. Papaursa (talk) 14:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Doesn't meet WP:GNG. -- Dane ^talk 04:31, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete shame though, as it looks dead interesting. ——Serial 16:08, 5 August 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.