Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compulsion (2016 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 keep. Nomination appears to be effectively withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 21:58, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Compulsion (2016 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)

Not notable. Fails WP:NFOE and WP:NFP. Could become a classic. scope_creep^Talk 19:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Delete. No critic reviews on RottenTomatoes, screened at a film festival but seemingly did not win any awards, and the one source currently attached is a review in a publication that doesn't clearly state its editorial practices and may not be RS. Sources added by Nardog clearly demonstrate notability. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:00, 20 December 2018 (UTC) 05:32, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Although I can't vouch for the independence and credibility of every one of the sources I just added, Cinematografo is a publication of Fondazione ente dello spettacolo, established in 1946; Film.it is owned by GEDI and partners with its sister publication La Stampa; NonSoloCinema is run by Cineforum Italiano, recognized by the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities; Cinematographe, Sentieri selvaggi, and Quinlan are legally registered journalistic periodicals, for what it's worth. So I don't see how it could possibly fail WP:GNG/WP:NFP.

(The whole reason I created the article was because I was once confused by another film titled Sadie, but I'm nonetheless surprised by this AfD to be honest. Analeigh Tipton and Jakob Cedergren are fairly known actors.) Nardog (talk) 05:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Three of the references provided indicate that Tipton is working on the film, one describes it as tired and derivative, one is listing and describing who is in the film. The Quinlan ref describes it as Sadie proves a work tired and derivative, lacking a personal look and a real expressive urgency., the cinematographe ref describes it as A quickly forgettable film, entieriselvaggi.it is an interview, and not applicable, Non RS. Film.it is a description of the film in the festival. On top of that it has a 3.6 on IMDB. It is not notable. The other ref was a neutral painting of colours, describing the colours used in the film. Ive no doubt it will become a cult classic. The idea that notable and very famous actors do not star in the most terrible and dud films is nonsense, please take a look at this List of films considered the worst. scope_creep^Talk 08:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to argue that it's a good film, but aren't the reviews in Quinlan and Il cineocchio enough to meet WP:GNG? _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:39, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rosguill It is definently wide coverage. I would say so. scope_creep^Talk 20:01, 21 December 2018 (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.