Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diez segundos

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Expanded so much since deletion that the nomination does not reflect the actual situation anymore. Tone 21:49, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diez segundos[edit]

Diez segundos (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This 1949 Argentine film has only sketchy coverage at IMDB, and Google Book search only showed a couple of dictionaries of films from Argentine which had any coverage, but the extent is unknown because no online view is provided. Does not appear to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (films). Edison (talk) 19:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Sketchy imdb coverage and only a few dictionaries of Argentine films mentioning it is to be expected for a 1949 Argentine movie! I've quickly looked into this and the studios and most of the leading actors were definitely notable. Yes, their articles now need expansion too. I see no evidence to indicate that this was anything other than a mainstream film in Argentina at the time, although the director has few credits to his name and is obviously not one of the blockbusters. I think given time you'd find more sources popping up in google books. I think we'd be better off keeping it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentWhy should we expect more sources 62 years after it premiered? Does being a "mainstream film" satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (films)? That said, Dr. Blofeld did a fine job of expanding the article in less than an hour, and adding whatever refs any of us are likely to find with diligent search, and which did not show up in Google Books.Refs 1 and 2 are online film databases, comparable to IMDB, and while they may contribute information, are not really supportive of notability, per the film notability guide. The books he retrieved and cited do not have any viewable content online that I could see. Maybe his local library has a copy of each? The last 2 refs relate to a later film 2 of the actors were in, and thus do not support notability either, though the information is certainly appropriate for the article. Edison (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree with parts of what you say, but I am not assured that Dr. Blofeld actually saw the text of the book, since he was citing it within minutes of the AFD being placed. That would not have been possible unless he owned the book or lived near a library which had a copy, or he could access the text online somehow. Without someone actually having seen the reference, verifiability is not really satisfied. The Spanish Wikipedia quotes the book, with two newspaper reeferences (neither apparently available online) but a Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In other words, I do not acknowledge that verifiabiliity is satisfied by an anonymous editor of the Spanish Wikipedia stating there that they referenced the work. Even in cases of "Non-English coverage," more than knowing some book exists is required to satisfy the demand that there is significant coverage of the subject in it. Edison (talk) 02:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The above rationale appears sound.Stormbay20:35, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A book search on "Diez segundos" wehner shows that four different books discuss the film, which seems enough to establish notability. "Diez segundos" estol shows another. Presumably there was more coverage in the Argentine magazines and papers at the time. The film does not seems to have been very good, but that is not the point. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per improvements made to article on a 62-year-old, post WWII, waaaaaaaaay pre-internet, Argentinian film made by notable Argentinian directors and starring notable Argentinian actors. As a part of Argentinian cinematic history that has made it into the enduring record, we have enough for this quite old Argentinian film to meet WP:NF. We do not expect nor demand that it have the same sort coverage as we might expect from something far more recent or made in the US. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it your view that there is a lower notability threshold for old foreign films than for recent US films? They just have to be mainstream films, and notability is inherited from the director and the actors? That is not consistent with the guideline for film notability. Edison (talk) 02:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not a "lower" expectation, just an understanding that we do not have the same expectation of coverage for older films that we do for modern. I see this as reflective of guideline's understanding that the film was made in 1949 in Argentina, and consideration for inclusion is based upon verifiability of the topic, and not about whether it is the "most" notable or newsworthy event "now" for an event in a post-WW2 Argentina. We consider rather, that it may be "just" notable enough through its having been shown as part of the enduring record of that country's film history. My view is that per WP:CSB, a film distributed in Argentina 62 years ago will not still be in the headlines, and it being shown as making it into the enduring record as part of Argentina's cinematic history through coverage in books is enough to allow me a reasonable belief that 62 years ago the film made some sort of impact through the particpation of those involved, even without me having personal access to possible Argentinian news archives from 1949, or access to books in Argentinian libraries. With respcts, the essay WP:NOTINHERITED does not mean we disregard that the guideline sanctioned consideration of involvement of notables, specially when that involvement can give clues to other search parameters... and this is consistant with the applicable guideline, as WP:NF itself considers the value of participation by notables when it instructs "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career." And through its having successful domestic distribution, even if only domestic to Argentina... as supported by the sources already found. And can anyone advise if Argentina was considered "a major film producing country" 62 years ago? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. — frankie (talk) 15:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There’s critical commentary from the 2000s ([1], p 69, and [2] ). The latter source, the Latin American Art Museum of Buenos Aires, (MALBA) calls it a perfect example of a B-movie. (“Además lo es por ser un ejemplo perfecto de nuestro cine de Clase B.”) Wikipedia:Notability (films) mentions being unique – this is asserted in the MALBA entry (“Este es un film argentino único en varios sentidos.”) The film notability guideline also mentions “selected for preservation in a national archive “- this film is included in the Network of Cultural Heritage Digital Contents, Argentinian Ministry of Culture. [3] Also held by the Basque Film Archive [4]. Other reliable sources discussing the movie are already present in the article. Novickas (talk) 18:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per reliable sources. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per reliable sources. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 16:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The world existed before the internet, and things produced then can be just as notable as those after The sources are sufficient. DGG ( talk ) 17:26, 31 October 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Diez_segundos&oldid=1142188219"