Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The God of Small Things (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 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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The God of Small Things (film)

[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 student short film. Article was created by an WP:SPA, who also created a page about the producer, Robert Tutak, which has been deleted twice. The sources include one 220-word capsule review, not by a professional film critic, but by a sub-editor of a lifestyle magazine who "loves telling stories through makeup" (in case you're wondering, she doesn't say anything about the makeup in the film). That's the only independent source.

The Clermont-Ferrand International Short Film Festival is a notable festival, but the page there is a stock description by the filmmakers. It doesn't show that the film was nominated for or received any award there. bdnews24.com is a primary source interview with the director. The trailer on YouTube and its Facebook page are not independent. The remaining sources are non-notable film festival sites or their partners. WP:MOSFILM advises discretion when mentioning festival awards because of the proliferation of film festivals and "award mills". No better sources found through the usual searches, in English and Bengali. Does not meet WP:NFILM or WP:GNG. Worldbruce (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Worldbruce (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As if SPA status wasn’t enough, the fact that the only independent source is of poor quality means that this article needs to go. WikiJoeB (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2021 (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.