Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Power of Darkness (1909 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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Power of Darkness (1909 film)[edit]

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

There don't seem to be much coverage about this 1909 short film. Most of the sources found regarding "The Power of Darkness" are about an 1886 play by Leo Tolstoy - The Power of Darkness. KingAndGod 08:02, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 10:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~ this 1909 lost film is unlikely to have much internet coverage and old Russian newspapers may well be paywalled but it does have a notable director and confirmation of its existence and the article is not a priority for deletion as it is not promoting anything. Atlantic306 (talk) 15:15, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Atlantic306: "Sources could exist" is not a valid reason to keep an article. Anyone can say that in any AfD to vote for keep. The 1886 play is very remarkable that it's probably the one referred to in "old Russian newspapers". KingAndGod 15:26, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- Perhaps it could be merged into The Power of Darkness as that article is not very long and theres not a lot to merge Atlantic306 (talk) 15:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:40, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. First Russian adaptation of Tolstoy. Historically significant director and producer. I have sources, and I'll try to get this article fleshed out, likely Monday or Tuesday. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a lot better than it was. Access to sources is a major challenge here. There exists a published synopsis (describing which scenes from the play are adapted in the film) as well as a contemporary review, both published in Сине-фоно [Cine-Phono] 3 (1909), but I don't have even the first clue how to access a copy, so I'm depending exclusively on Piispa's excerpts from that source. Nevertheless, that source unquestionably exists, so the addition of a plot section and expansion of the reception are certainly possible. Regardless, in addition to being the first Russian-produced film adaptation of Tolstoy, this was also evidently the directorial debut of Pyotr Chardynin. I'm fairly sure that drags this over the finish line for WP:NFILM under a couple of different criteria, but I'll continue to see what I can dig up (including trying to figure out if there's any chance I can get my hands on that issue of Сине-фоно. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep moving to full keep as the article has been expanded using extra reliable sources so it passes WP:NFILM and WP:GNG Atlantic306 (talk) 19:14, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NFILM, historical movie with historical importance. Covered in reliable academic sources like Encyclopedia of Russian Cinema as well as journal, these sources are more credible than blog and WordPress pages that must new movies of this age rely on. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:58, 17 April 2018 (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.