Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exclusive Movies

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. I don't see a third relist bringing about any additional input. Star Mississippi 00:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Exclusive Movies

[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)

All listed sources seem to be announcements of specific movies' screenings, not in-depth coverage about the subject. Googling the subject does not seem to bring up much better sources. I does not seem to pass WP:NCORP. MarioGom (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the sources are suitable and do not include any exageration. حسن علي البط (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All sources are reliable and there is no promotion ، Thanks Kitrsjlhf (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~:the sources are suitable and do not include any exageration. حسن علي البط (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]
~~:All sources are reliable and there is no promotion ، Thanks Kitrsjlhf (talk) 18:55, 9 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. MarioGom (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~:the sources are suitable and do not include any exageration. حسن علي البط (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]
~~:All sources are reliable and there is no promotion ، Thanks Kitrsjlhf (talk) 18:55, 9 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:30, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~All sources are reliable and there is no promotion ، Thanks. Kitrsjlhf (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]

~~All sources are reliable and there is no promotion ، Thanks Kitrsjlhf (talk) 18:54, 9 April 2022 (UTC)~~[reply]

I've struck several duplicate comments that seem to be the result of a cut & paste binge. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 16:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the references meet our criteria for establishing the notability of corps/orgs - fails WP:NCORP HighKing⁺⁺ 13:50, 23 April 2022 (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.