Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fu Works

: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 redirect to San Fu Maltha with no prejudice to reversion. This is really a Keep closure with a personal editorial decision to redirect (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 17:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Fu Works]]=

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

I can't find any reliable sources that show notability. Fails WP:CORP. Schuym1 (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Weak keep See [http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117924202.html?categoryid=31&cs=1] -- San Fu Matha does get mentioned in a RS for a film which is alsready on WP (actually a number of mentions, albeit none done about the company). Definitely meets notability standards, but the article is not of high quality at this point. Collect (talk) 13:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep. Significant coverage in Dutch media ([http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ad.nl%2Fcultuurenshow%2Farticle352176.ece&sl=nl&tl=en], [http://209.85.143.101/translate_c?hl=en&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http://www.nrc.nl/anp/kunst/article1684663.ece/Filmproducent_Fu_Works_breidt_uit_naar_Indonesie&prev=hp&usg=ALkJrhjyTDV7kLMxI-92C3DwTm6IeKMrYg], [http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.volkskrant.nl%2Fkunst%2Farticle425512.ece&sl=nl&tl=en], [http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.destentor.nl%2Falgemeen%2Fcultuurstn%2Farticle588379.ece&sl=nl&tl=en], [http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.volkskrant.nl%2Fkunst%2Farticle183267.ece&sl=nl&tl=en], [http://209.85.143.102/translate_c?hl=en&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http://www.nrc.nl/anp/kunst/article1792209.ece/Zwartboek_is_kaskraker&prev=hp&usg=ALkJrhhI_Jiadm7_L-zuqZzLVFWbeAkTPg]) apart from coverage from English media for the film Black Book (film). 25 Other credits [http://www.imdb.com/company/co0052520/ present]. In case the final verdict still leans towards delete, at least it should be redirected to San Fu Maltha. ^LeaveSleaves 12:01, 24 January 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.