Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Gionet

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 No consensus / redirect. There is no consensus about the filmmaker. There is consensus to not keep the film (split between delete and merge, which I implement as a redirect). This is mostly for lack of discussion about the reasons for the filmmaker's notability or lack thereof. Another discussion may therefore be needed about the filmmaker. Sandstein 08:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Gionet[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)

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

WP:BLP of a filmmaker and an article about his film, both referenced entirely to either glancing namechecks of his and/or the film's existence in sources that aren't about them, or primary sources that aren't support for notability at all. The notability claim here is that his film won or was nominated for short film awards at second-tier film festivals like Saguenay, Cinéfest Sudbury and Clermont-Ferrand -- but WP:NFILM does not extend an automatic notability freebie to just every single film award that exists, but instead requires major awards that get broad media coverage (e.g. Oscars, Canadian Screen Awards or top-tier film festivals like Cannes, Berlin or TIFF.) The question of whether an award makes its winners encyclopedically notable or not is determined by how wide and broad the award's media coverage is or isn't: awards that get widely reported as national or international news count as notability makers, while awards that get little or no attention outside their own local catchment area, so that you have to rely on either the local newspaper or the award's own self-published website about itself to source the claim, do not.
It would be different if he and the film could actually be shown to clear WP:GNG on their sourceability, but just winning minor awards at film festivals of only regional prominence is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to be sourced better than this. Obviously no prejudice against recreation in March if it makes the Canadian Screen Award for Best Live Action Short Drama and/or Prix Iris for Best Live Action Short Film shortlists, but Saguenay and Cinéfest aren't enough. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the film into the auteur, per WP:OUTCOMES, as we (and I) have done many times for when both are marginally notable. Bearian (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

We'd have to establish the filmmaker's notability (which nothing in the article does) in the first place before this would be the appropriate answer. Bearcat (talk) 15:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Bearian. –Cupper52^Discuss! 12:58, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge what? We'd have to establish the filmmaker's notability, which nothing in his article does, in the first place before he could become keepable. Bearcat (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. Bearcat is right (he usually is) - we can't bloody well close as a merge when the proposed merge target lacks notability entirely as well. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:35, 8 February 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.