Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inffinito

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. per consensus. Passes GNG and independent coverage. (non-admin closure) The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inffinito[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)

Seemingly routine coverage of events by the organization, no WP:SIGCOV or WP:NORG to denote for notability. nearlyevil 665 04:41, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,@Nearlyevil665: the page was created (by me) in a rush in order to make decisions there clearer, would you please consider withdrawing until the other Afd is closed? Thanks.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:51, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. nearlyevil 665 04:41, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, fails GNG and NORG. Source in the article and found in BEFORE are event promo, mill news, nothing that meets WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 18:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh....OK, so much for temporary withdrawal but hey. All right, then, keep. Enough independent reliable sources covering the subject. Some are even on the page....A lot more exists, just click news for example. O Globo mentioned its 25 years of existence or this. The festival has been repeatedly described by reliable sources as the main Brazilian film event outside Brazil. Also see Veja (here) or this. ETC. Not notable, how?-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I also found this article in The Vancouver Sun discussing Inffinito's Brazilian Film Festival in the context of appreciation of Brazilian film. Toughpigs (talk) 17:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there are now a number of reliable sources used in the article such as multiple Brazilian newspapers and Canadian newspapers so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:16, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think there is a valid concern about whether the sources are simply routine coverage. However, my judgment is that these sources show there is something notable here, and putting the content under the umbrella of the parent organization seems like a reasonable editorial decision at this time.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:34, 4 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.