Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moods of the Sea

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. Nomination withdrawn, with the only delete vote also withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Donaldd23 (talk) 21:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moods of the Sea[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)

Non notable film, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE to help it pass WP:NFILM. Tagged since 2017.

PROD removed without explanation. Donaldd23 (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep its legacy as an experimental film has it meeting film notability. A BEFORE search would have shown a number of sources suggesting notability. Will add some to article now. I added a "sources exist tag" to the article when I deprodded. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 02:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources that exist, but are snippet or no view available:
Delete, does not pass gng. versacespace talk to me 03:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I was able to find evidence that this has screened at multiple film festivals, some in the last 10 or so years. There is also coverage in the academic/scholarly sphere per the sourcing in the article. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:54, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Donaldd23: I've done a substantial overhaul to the article. What do you think? I pulled out my best Google-fu for this one. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good now. I withdraw my nomination, but it can't be closed unless @VersaceSpace: also withdraws their 'Delete' vote. Thanks @ReaderofthePack:! Donaldd23 (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

withdrawn, versacespace talk to me 16:20, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]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.