Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ho Ho Ho (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 keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Ho Ho (film)[edit]

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

~~Non-notable film, per WP:NOTFILM - direct-to-video release, filmed in two days, no major awards or coverage --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 14:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)~~ Nominator withdraws per added Romanian-language references establishing notability. --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 20:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The film is the first Romanian Christmas comedy. If I link articles saying this, is it notable to some degree? George Lupeanu (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, such would add to assertions of notability. Can you translate the sources found below? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the first film in a film genre does not automatically make it notable. --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 15:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC) Keep withdraw nomination per added Romanian-language references establishing notability. --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 20:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And no, that the nom reaffirms his opinion here does not make it a second vote. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. LoudHowie (talk) 21:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It seems to have garnered quite a lot of coverage in the press in Romania,[1][2] including in daily newspapers such as Adevărul,[3] which would make it notable per the WP:GNG. We should mind our WP:Systemic bias. Fences&Windows 20:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 20:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 20:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep What matters to Wikipedia and notability is the extensive coverage allowing it to meet WP:GNG [4]. What?? Its Romanan coverage?? So what.... its a Romanian film. Coverage is exactly where it is expected to be. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two of you have posted links to sources establishing notability on this discussion page. Why don't you post them on the article page, too? I don't speak Romanian, so all I have to go by is what I can find. If notability is not readily apparent, it's my responsibility to raise the question of inclusion. I'm thrilled that you have found sources - cite them in the article, and I'll happily support keeping the article. Cheers! --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 02:47, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think we are the same as you in being unable to translate the found sources. That they were findable means that the article can be improved through regular editing... and as such does not merit deletion. However, I'll have a go with Goggle Translate and see what can be done. Romanian-reading Wikipedians... help! !!!! Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some improvements have been made. More in the offing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - had theatrical release, as well as in-depth coverage in major papers ([5], [6], [7], [8], etc). - Biruitorul ^Talk 04:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It had notable coverage, so its notable. Dream Focus 04:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems like we need to get some help from WP:WikiProject Romania with translating, but if those sources establish notability, there shouldn't be a problem. AniMate 05:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Additional sourcing has been added. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes WP:NF. Joe Chill (talk) 02:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep this one please nominator has been withdrawn now yuckfoo (talk) 00:53, 8 December 2009 (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.