Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orania (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 delete. Sandstein 19:53, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orania (film)[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 with only three sources, two of which are the film itself and a singular appearance at a film festival. Desertambition (talk) 04:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bsoyka (talk) 04:35, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Assessed the current references in the table below. Can any of the sources listed at http://www.orania-film.de/press.html be tracked down to check their reliability? Bsoyka (talk) 04:38, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table: prepared by User:Bsoyka
Vimeo	Trailer/teaser to promote the film	value not understood	~	✘ No
Raindance Film Festival	~ Selling tickets for viewing the film	value not understood	~	? Unknown
Orania	The film's website			✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: South Africa and Germany. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:31, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete At best it should be covered as a single sentence mention on the main page about the town. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 09:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Orania, Northern Cape#Works about Orania as it is mentioned there and I don't think it's notable enough for a separate article. Suonii180 (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No effective sources. No time for editor who don't reference, in relatively modern article. scope_creep^Talk 18:48, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above comments. No need to redirect, in my opinion, as it would be very unlikely for someone to enter a disambiguated article title as a search term. --Noahfgodard (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2022 (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.