Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donovan Slacks

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) 22:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Donovan Slacks[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)

At best, a bit of overly enthusiast in-universe writing or an attempt to promote the film.[1] Created in 2004‎, tagged with needing additional citations since 2010, and only sourced to the sites connected to the film and geocities-ish sites. But this is just a non-notable character from a small, independent film. I searched Google, ebsco, proquest, newspapers.com, proquest, and archive.org. From the Vimeo listing (my emph) Iranian-English director Kivmars Bowling has found a new way to bring period drama to a modern audience and bring this original story to life. [2] Nothing in the archived director statement or any other marketing materials claims the movie is based on a real person (press kit: [3]). The movie was in production when the article was created (see [4] from the film's blog: The script was written in 2002/3 and we shot the film in England in 2004.). Our article links to [5] which has documents that purport to be official government documents but are likely made for the film). (I think the movie is of questionable notability (zero published reviews) but the claim that it was the last movie be filmed with "Kodachrome 40 Super 8 film" [6] is interesting but I can't find any independent, reliable sources repeating the claim. I think creating a fresh article on the film if sources are found would be the path forward.) Skynxnex (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Film, History, and England. Skynxnex (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It's an article, written in an in-universe fashion, about a non-notable fictional character made to promote a movie. No reason to keep this. You could probably request speedy deletion under G11 or maybe even even G3. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@StreetcarEnjoyer I considered that but perhaps doubted my ability to be sure I was correct. I also don't think it's "unambiguous" for G11 and G3 is probably a bit edge too. I don't have any objections to an admin deleting it that way since I doubt we'll need a deletion discussion to keep it deleted. Skynxnex (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I don't find anything about a film or whatever this stub is supposed to be about. Plenty of hits on Donovans, nothing for this thing. Oaktree b (talk) 21:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article about a fictional character in a movie I can find no RS independent coverage for. ResonantDis_tortion 11:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wasn't obvious reading through at first, so worth noting the film and character have the same name. The character is non-notable and the film wouldn't pass WP:NFILM. hinnk (talk) 21:35, 11 February 2024 (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.