Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Up Goes Maisie

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. postdlf (talk) 05:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Up Goes Maisie[edit]

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

Article seems to be an orphan and is unreferenced. Intoronto1125 TalkContributions 03:38, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as creator. Did you click on What links here? Nine links hardly make it an orphan. Also, I've added reviews. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The film is part of a fairly popular series starring Ann Sothern. There's also plenty of sources (reviews) in the article right now that establish its notability. Pinkadelica ^♣ 13:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep per The New York Times review, though I'm not crazy about the TV Guide and AllRovi capsule reviews. Google Books Search results are pretty sparse with nothing in Google Scholar Search, but I'm assuming that this is both the age of the film and its relative lack of significance. Is there anything more that can be found? Erik (talk | contribs) 18:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Normally I stay away from AllRovi references, but in this case, it ties in nicely with both Crowther's complaint and the aviation film category. As for TV Guide, it's a reliable enough source (and pretty much spot on with its observations about this film). Clarityfiend (talk) 00:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:Clarityfiend and his continued work on the article as its author. We do not expect that a comedy film from 1946 would have the same type of ongoing coverage and analysis as do more recent blockbusters. WP:NTEMP. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:58, 4 January 2013 (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.