Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/When the Night

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. Sandstein 06:11, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When the Night

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Fails WP:MOVIE. One of 22 feature length films that won no prize in the 68th Venice International Film Festival. Only citation is dead link to the Film Festival announcement. No significant reviews by reliable sources in English. Does not belong in En WP. DocTree (talk) 04:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 May 4. Snotbot t • c » 04:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Being nominated for the top prize at Venice meets the notability guidance. I've added another ref too. Lugnuts (talk) 05:48, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some English-language sources[1][2] and lots of Italian[3][4][5][6][7]. There is no requirement for reliable sources to be in English. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment --Colapeninsula, the first link you provide is a review in a reliable source, Vogue Italia that tells how badly the film was received. The second link is an interview with the director and author of the book and screenplay, only mentioning the film. The third link you list above is a promotional piece published before the film was released and fails WP:CRYSTAL for reliability or evidence that the film is notable. The fourth link provided above is a somewhat reliable source that reports laughter during dramatic scenes, whistles as the credits rolled and the certainty of a bad rating when the film was screened at the Venice Film Festival. The fifth link provides another negative review. Negative reviews do not make a film notable. That the director/author was interviewed does not support notability. The article fails WP:NOTFILM. Just being mentioned in articles, no matter what language, is not evidence of notability. Reviews and mentions of how badly a film was received do not support keeping the article. DocTree (talk) 16:55, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The deadlink has been fixed. Sources don't need to be in English, and this film was selected to compete at one of the most prestigious film festivals in the world, therefore easily meeting WP:GNG. Lugnuts (talk) 19:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Reliable sources published before the film's release does show notability along with negative reviews in reliable sources. Reviews, no matter how negative, do show notability per WP:NF along with reliable coverage of how poorly a film was received. You might as well nominate Disaster Movie for deletion while you're at it if you seriously believe that. They are also not just mentions when the articles focus only on the film. SL93 (talk) 21:38, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- There is also Variety. SL93 (talk) 21:42, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, reliable sources don't need to be in English nor do they have to be positive. Per WP:MOVIE, a film can be considered notable if it "has received a major award for excellence". Competing alone doesn't make a film notable under WP:GNG. WP:NPOV is a problem. The English translation of [8] begins, "Cristina Comencini's film, with Filippo Timi and Claudia Pandolfi, is a disaster, the worst movie seen this year in Venice" and ends with, "When the Night has really touched the bottom and has embarrassed the entire Italian cinema in front of the international press (thankfully not shown)." In other links cited by Colapeninsula above, reporters wrote about whistles instead of applause as the movie ended. In my judgement, When the Night doesn't deserve an article in WP. If an article on this film does remain in WP, it must present a balanced report on all of the information available about it including that other Italian filmmakers consider the film an embarrassment. DocTree (talk) 22:07, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about the award nomination. I care about the reliable sources presented so far. It does pass WP:NF per those sources no matter what the contents and your subjective opinion of those contents. SL93 (talk) 22:12, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Keep Stub or not, this topic passes WP:MOVIE easily. I hope the nominator might understand that non English sources are perfectly acceptable, and that a film's notability is not dependent upon whether or not it was well received, but rather by it being covered in enough detail so that an encyclopedic article can be written. And to his opinion that a topic covered in other parts of the world or only in other languages has no place in Wikipedia... that is NOT the way we build an encyclopedia. In actually being proactive in looking, it is easy to see that THIS topic has the requisite coverage in BOTH English and non-English sources: Hollywood Reporter (English) Monsters & Critics (English) Repubblica (1) (Italian) Repubblica (2) (Italian) Coming Soon (Italian) Vogue (Italian) Último Segundo (Italian) Everyeye (Italian) NonSoloCinema (Italian) Viva Cinema (Italian) and many more.[9][10]. Point here being that, even if they pan the film, we have multiple in-depth secondary coverage showing the topic as notable. And while these have not yet been used to expand the current stub, notability is dependent upon sources being available... and not upon their being used within an article. As it has been shown that we have plenty with which to improve this article, AND as it is no longer the poorly sourced content and context-lacking stub that was first brought to AFD, perhaps the nominator might consider a withdrawal? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Has received sufficient coverage to have an article. No good reason has been presented for deletion. --Michig (talk) 10:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep per lack of WP:BEFORE, and per WP:SNOW a withdrawal is strongly suggested. Cavarrone (talk) 12:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and withdraw my nomination for deletion. Thanks to all who searched for and found additional citations to prove {{WP:GNG|notability]]. Recently announced inclusion of When the Night in the schedules of art theaters and in indie and foreign film festivals in the USA proves it belongs in the en Wikipedia. DocTree (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Winning awards is not a prerequisite for a foreign film having an article. Also congrats to all those who have put in their efforts to improve the article. MarnetteD | Talk 13:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm sorry to notice that some users don't recognize as deep sources articles written in another language than English. It's the same problem that exists in the page Fabio Massimo Cacciatori, that is linked with this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cricriwiki (talk • contribs) 15:44, 11 May 2012 (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.