Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cul-de-sac 2010
=[[Cul-de-sac 2010]]=
:{{la|Cul-de-sac 2010}} – (
:({{Find sources|Cul-de-sac 2010}})
No indication whatsoever that this meets WP:GNG or WP:NF. This article was speedied once, and PROD'd twice, but an IP user removed the prod tags. Time to just take to AFD. — Timneu22 · talk 14:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. No indication of notability. Nsk92 (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Delete. The single reference, despite being from a notable source, makes only a trivial mention to the film at best. There doesn't seem to be an [http://www.imdb.com/find?s=all&q=cul-de-sac ImDB] entry for it either, and a [http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cul-de-sac&submit=Google+Search&lang=en google search] seems to only produce hits for the 1966 Cul-de-Sac. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)- Keep I googled the name kiana firouz (The subject of the film) and found several pages about her and quite a few of these reference the movie.
Thediva (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Changed my mind per Thediva: Keep. The Kiana Firouz article has several references which appear to make reference to the film, which could benefit this article. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
:*As a side note though, I'm not sure of the convention here, but I think the article should be moved: perhaps "Cul-de-sac (2010 film)" would be more suitable? GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 21:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
::*Not in this case, as the film title appears to be Cul-de-sac 2010.[http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cul-de-sac+2010%22&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8] Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
:::*Ah, my mistake, sorry. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 22:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
::::*It was a sensible question to ask. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep, but consider Merge with Kiana Firouz. There are plenty of sources available (see that article), but I don't think there's a need for two articles here on the same topic - the film arguably isn't notable independent of its filmmaker, and vice versa. Robofish (talk) 14:37, 28 May 2010 (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.