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 delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:43, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norwich Film Festival (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article was previously deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norwich Film Festival, and later re-created by the same author, who has a conflict of interest, having referred to the festival in the first person. The re-created version does no more than the one discussed in the previous AfD discussion. 7 of the 8 cited sources are: 3 pages on the festival's own site; 2 pages (one of them a blog) on the site of the publishers of a film that tells us it won an award at the festival, and says nothing else about the festival; another page that does no more than mention that the same film won an award; a dead link. That leaves just one genuine third party source with significant coverage, at this BBC page. However, even that one is just for the local Norfolk branch of the BBC, not the national BBC, and that one source alone is not nearly enough to establish notability under Wikipedia guidelines. My own searches have also failed to produce significant coverage in any independent reliable source. Although it is not by itself a reason for deletion, it is also worth noting that the article was written for promotional purposes. The author of the article actually stated that he/she intended the article to help the festival in "gaining publicity". JamesBWatson (talk) 14:33, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - without prejudice to recreation in the future if it becomes notable. There's some local coverage, but that's it. -- Whpq (talk) 16:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not enough third party references 193.109.199.71 (talk) 15:36, 9 October 2013 (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.