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. Euryalus (talk) 11:54, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

At the very least, WP:TOOSOON. This is an odd duck: a recently established film festival in the French capital... uniquely in English. No French organization name, even. As for coverage in reliable sources: Google reveals no bona fide reliable sources, and the few quotes and sources cited in the article doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:CORPDEPTH. I don't know how one manages to have an "international film festival" in a capital of world cinema almost unnoticed, but these chaps seem to have pulled it off. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:41, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments! Since the proposed deletion, more sources have been added. The festival is recently established, but already featured on the official site of the "Office du Tourisme", being mentioned in French print media, attended by numerous French and international filmmakers (many mentioned/posted on event's facebook-page, etc.). I did not add many sources from filmmaker's own pages - you can find many more mentioning their screenings in Paris. I see how WP:TOOSOON could be argued, but we have to take into account that the festival is a new event which fills a screening room of 150 seats - and for an event this size and this age, it has already attracted quite some attention, being featured in press, and attracting international filmmakers to travel to Paris as well as French filmmakers to premiere their works there.Mike300578 (talk) 10:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• It's the lack of significant, notable "French print media" coverage that puzzles me. Where is it? Can you link to the two or three strongest ones at this Afd? I checked the current state of the article. I see a lot of minor weblinks, but it almost seems to me to be an attempt to compensate for the fact that there is nothing significant, as per WP:GNG and WP:RS. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

in looking beyond the article:

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

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

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

• Delete as too soon also, newly started and nothing yet convincing for the applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 23:32, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 May 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:41, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete I wasn't able to uncover enough Independant coverage to make an article worthwhile, am open to changing my vote if more can be found. Artw (talk) 14:03, 11 June 2016 (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.