Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"Presidential Conscience"

:{{la|"Presidential Conscience"}} ([{{fullurl:"Presidential Conscience"|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"Presidential Conscience"}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Student film with no evidence of notability provided or found ThaddeusB (talk) 01:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete How did this escape speedy deletion before? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• It was PRODded and the PROD removed. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. At no point does the article come anywhere near our general notability guidelines. Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Firestorm ^Talk 03:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Snow Delete, obviously It is ridiculous to have to wait a week for trivial articles like this to go. The article tells us: "Since it was only a student project, very few people have actually seen the film, but the director's reaction to the movie was 'it was disappointing' and he 'could have done a lot better'." Does that not read like a declaration of non-notability? JamesBWatson (talk) 09:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment The article is duplicated at Presidential Conscience (without quotes). That has been prodded, and as yet not contested. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:03, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: A non-notable film by a high school student. Fails WP:NF. Joe Chill (talk) 13:52, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Snow Delete No evidence of notability, in fact, as JamesBWatson says, it even highlights its own non-notability! Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 13:59, 23 July 2009 (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.