Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sick Girl (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. czar 04:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sick Girl (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)

Underground exploitation film. Rotten Tomatoes has found zero - 0 - professional reviews (and a measly 227 user scores.) Won an award at a festival for which there's no article. Most of the cast are unknowns. Geschichte (talk) 21:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:40, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Red-linked actor, film festival and director. Fangoria isn't a primary source. The article is mostly a rehashing of the plot. No notability established Oaktree b (talk) 03:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Roller26 (talk) 11:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NFILM Donaldd23 (talk) 15:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Donaldd23, Oaktree b, and Shellwood: This has reviews from major outlets, specifically Dread Central and DVD Talk. This is enough on its own to establish notability, as both are considered to be reliable sources for reviews. There is also some other coverage in the article, which on its own wouldn't be enough to establish notability but when put with the reviews pushes this into a more solid keep on my end. I normally don't WP:TROUT people, but it looks like the DVD Talk review was in the article (albeit poorly added reference markup language wise) and the Dread Central review came up in the first page of Google results. With other outlets, Ginger Nuts of Horror is typically seen as a reliable source as it's been used as a source in academic/scholarly texts like this and has also been nominated for several Locus Awards, a fairly notable award. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:57, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Changing vote to keep based on ReaderofthePack's rationale. Donaldd23 (talk) 12:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 08:07, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has reviews in reliable sources as identified in this discussion so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Clarkcj12 (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per identified sources. — Toughpigs (talk) 18:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has premiered at film festivals, has non-trivial reviews, etc. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:43, 14 November 2020 (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.