Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acidman (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. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 00:31, 5 July 2022 (UTC)]
Acidman (film)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Acidman (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Lacking significant coverage by independent sources, all coverage is just a reprint of the summary coming out of Tribeca, per
]- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep. I found some coverage, but not in the strongest sites as far as reviews go. It's enough to pass NFILM, but just barely. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:37, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep There are 9 Critic Reviews at Rotten Tomatoes [1]. Only 2 critic reviews are needed to pass WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 21:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)]
- Keep As the editor who moved it from Draft to article space: I did so after the Tribeca premiere because it met NFILM, if barely, and once a draft qualifies to be an article it isn't really advised to keep it in draftspace. Needs work, but not even the worst just-passes-notability film stub coming out of Tribeca. Kingsif (talk) 23:05, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Donaldd23. While it only could (at best) be a start article, the 9 RT reviews is more than the minimum 2 required. Not all are reliable, but it definitely meets GNG IMO. Thanks! VickKiang (talk) 07:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, per sources that show notability, but a word of caution – those nine reviews ought to be individually cited and used to write an article, not merely gestured at in an AfD! jp×g 21:02, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- 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.