Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cool Apocalypse

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. Nakon 21:31, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cool Apocalypse[edit]

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

Non-notable film, no independent reliable coverage, does not satisfy guidelines for notable films BOVINEBOY2008 10:49, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article should not be deleted. Cool Apocalypse is notable for being an independent film that has had public screenings (and won awards) at two international film festivals in two different states. Among the "independent reliable coverage" in the article are links to the official website of the Illinois International Film Festival, on which the film's award-winning status is noted, the Internet Movie Database, and the website of filmmaker/critic Julian Grant, who reviewed the film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelgsmith (talk • contribs) 13:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Delete without prejudice for a return when this gets analysis and commentary in multiple reliable sources. It has screened and received peer recognition through awards, but still needs a bit more coverage. Okay with it being returned to its author as a user draft. It's simply a bit TOO SOON. But @Michaelgsmith: as it appears from username that you might be its writer/director Michael Glover Smith, I wish to advise that while WP:COI does not absolutely forbid you writing about your own project here, because of a personal connection with the project it is strongly discouraged. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 22:38, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:07, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Admittingly it does sound a great film but per MQS it's way TOOSOON for an article and the COI doesn't fill me with any confidence, I suggest Michaelgsmith takes a step back and let an editor create the article once more sources pop up - Constantly creating it yourself only means it'll keep being deleted and then eventually salted which would then mean it'll never be recreated again so I'd stop if I were you , No objections to recreation once more sources crop up. –Davey2010^Talk 01:27, 9 June 2015 (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.