Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Road of Love: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 23:35, 16 April 2020

The Road of Love

[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, per WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 09:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Does pass WP:NF The source of the film itself is available, This article is about a festival film that is currently on public display Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 10:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- None of the coverage is significant, they are all just listings that the film exists. Existence is not the same as Notability. And there is no independent coverage of the film at the festival. Again, just being in a festival (unless its a major major festival) does not signify notability. BOVINEBOY2008 11:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
-BOVINEBOY The coverage is remarkable for this film, The filmmaker is remarkable and the film itself has been remarkable in Iran Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 11:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Please provide citation. There are none in the article. BOVINEBOY2008 11:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- BOVINEBOY There are citations in the article! Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 12:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is only one CITATION in the article, and it is IMDb, which should not be used as a source anyway per WP:CITEIMDB. There are EXTERNAL LINKS which are not citations, and they are all just database listing, not actually significant coverage. Can you provide an article that is covering the film? Like an interview from a credible source about the film or a review of the film? BOVINEBOY2008 16:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
BOVINEBOY IMDb is a resource, and other resources in the language of the country that made the film.Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 21:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- They are not independent sources that indicate notability though, please read WP:NFSOURCES carefully! BOVINEBOY2008 21:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
BOVINEBOY I read it,If the resources are low, there is no reason to delete the articleHoseinkhosravii (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As per nom. based on unreliable sources. @ Hoseinkhosravii you can NOT vote because you are the creator of this article. you can just comment. Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 12:13, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The creator is free to vote keep at AFD as per WP:AFD Atlantic306 (talk) 00:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

- Spada II ♪♫ As per nom , what do you repeat everywhere? Do you just want to delete all the articles?Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 12:21, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Hoseinkhosravii: "per nom" means "in reference to" (per) + "the person who nominated the article" (nom). It's a piece of jargon which editors use in Deletion debates. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references are accuracy and significantعلیرضا رضوی (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Apart from the film's IMDb page and a mirror site, the references are just video streaming sites. Nobody is saying that the film doesn't exist, but it doesn't appear to have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, I recommend that before people vote, they read WP:NFSOURCES so they can understand what would be required. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- ~dom Kaos~ But according to WP:NF, the resources are enough for the article and your opinion is the opposite, You should also consider the importance of the article in the country of origin Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - To quote WP:NF

Examples of coverage insufficient to fully establish notability include newspaper listings of screening times and venues, "capsule reviews", plot summaries without critical commentary, or listings in comprehensive film guides such as Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide, Time Out Film Guide, or the Internet Movie Database.

Bolding is mine for emphasis. BOVINEBOY2008 18:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The movie database and its playback are complete and accurate.Hoseinkhosravii (talk) 21:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They don't signify notability though. Find an independent source that talks about the film. BOVINEBOY2008 21:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The source is in the articleHoseinkhosravii (talk) 21:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable due to no significant coverage in reliable sources about this film. Hate to say it, but this looks like self-promotion per WP:PROMO. Just because a person exists and has made a film does not mean the person or the film is notable. We need notability to be established through secondary sources. Wikipedia does not lead the way in establishing notability; it follows sources that cover the topic significantly. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 16:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Erik Coverage of resources in the article is available and sufficient, Its manufacturer is important in its workHoseinkhosravii (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, there is no actual coverage available about the film. If by manufacturer you mean the director Danial Hajibarat, that subject is not notable either. The two topics cannot be played off of each other. Both topics need reliable sourcing, and there is none for this film nor its director. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Erik The sources for both articles are accurate and reliable, but because they are not in your language, you will not accept them. There are enough resourcesHoseinkhosravii (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep was able to pass WP:NF Bidelirania (talk) 19:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Bidelirania, your username matches the name of the company which produced this film, according to IMDb. In the interests of transparency, please could you confirm whether you have a Conflict of Interest? ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 18:02, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~dom Kaos~ No,The similarity is in the name, This is a current name, It has nothing else Bidelirania (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bidelirania so you are telling us that you have no connection to the film company despite the fact that you have only made edits to subjects that are incredibly close to the film company? Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:25, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the references are reliable sources and most are just links to the trailer on different hosting sites. There is no significant, in-depth coverage at all, not from any major Iranian newspapers or any of its major news agencies. Best, GPL93 (talk) 23:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 * [[User:Dom Kaos|~dom Kaos~]] No,The similarity is in the name, This is a current name, It has nothing else [[User:Bidelirania|Bidelirania]] ([[User talk:Bidelirania|talk]]) 21:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 ::{{u|Bidelirania}} so you are telling us that you have no connection to the film company despite the fact that you have only made edits to subjects that are incredibly close to the film company? Best, [[User:GPL93|GPL93]] ([[User_talk:GPL93|talk]]) 23:25, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' None of the references are [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] and most are just links to the trailer on different hosting sites. There is no significant, in-depth coverage at all, not from [[List of newspapers in Iran|any major Iranian newspapers]] or any of its [[List of Iranian news agencies|major news agencies]]. Best, [[User:GPL93|GPL93]] ([[User_talk:GPL93|talk]]) 23:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)