Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2:22 (2008 film)

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 Speedy keep. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2:22 (2008 film)

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

canadian non notable film. I don't like it at all. Pls delete it. A hoax. 116.87.23.198 (talk) 06:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This AFD nomination was hardcoded into the daily log. I moved it to its own proper listing. No comment from me. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:37, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and probably close. The IP editor should read WP:BEFORE. This film isn't a hoax and WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a valid reason for deletion. According to IMDB, it won a top award at the Malibu Film Festival and the article seems to pass WP:GNG. Lugnuts ^{And the horse} 08:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's almost impossible to Google for this, but I think it's got enough coverage - IMDb lists 6 reviews[1] most of which are already cited. Here's a Variety story[2] and LA Times review[3] as well. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:58, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it's possible to google for this. As the creator of the page, that is how I managed to find sources. But I don't understand the rationale behind the nominator's comments at all. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 11:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong and snow keep This is not a hoax and yes, just like Lugnuts said, it won many awards, according to teh official film website and IMdB. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 11:13, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep as this is a frivolous nomination. Notable and clearly not a hoax. --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:43, 7 September 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.