Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Five Across The Eyes

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 No consensus, which of course defaults to keep. No prejudice against a relist sometime in the future. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Five Across the Eyes (film)

Five Across the Eyes (film) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No film notability met (or asserted), possible vanity from single-purpose account. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Keep - The film is noticable as it was released internationally, it is not an amateur film so therefore it is not a vanity page. OOODDD (talk) 16:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete unless the awards & festival showings can be reliably sourced and/or better secondary coverage can be established. I found a little bit of practically-trivial coverage here, which can possibly be added to the sources. Reference 3 (this link) is currently broken...it's a blog on the AMC-TV site and there seems to be a problem w/ post permalinks, probably 'cause they didn't name them differently (see #2 here). The film festival at which the award was won is of dubious notability itself...The article also needs a cleanup (the plot section is currenlty an exact copy of its cited reference). — Scientizzle 17:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
• Delete so many redlinks all in one place! No reliable independant sources to substantiate awards & festival showings, which is the sole assertion of notability. JERRY ^talk _contribs 04:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - there is at least some evidence in the article already, and it appears there is more out there to prove notability. Bearian (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I hate red links, too, but I can deal with this one. Bearian (talk) 17:03, 22 February 2008 (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.