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The result was nomination withdrawn. Seraphimblade 04:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Qerq[edit]

~~Non notable film, prod was contested. Delete from me. J Milburn 13:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)~~ Withdrawing nomination, sources added. J Milburn 22:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What constitutes a notable film? Does it have to be an international release to be notable? Marcus1234 13:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CommentAccording to the guideline, a film is notable if it is released nationwide in a country. Qerq will be released nationwide in Malta on the 31st of January, so that makes in notable. Marcus1234 13:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Those guidlines are only proposed, but, in either case, there would have to be a high density of cinemas in Malta, and it would have to be released in almost all of them to meet that guidline. J Milburn 14:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Since the guideline is only proposed, I guess it's impossible for you or anyone else to say that a movie is non-notable, isn't it? On what are you basing your assumption that the film is not notable enough? And regarding the "density of cinemas", I can't see how that relates to the proposed guideline, which simply states: The film has been theatrically released nationwide in a country, or into 200 or more commercial theaters. Qerq will be released in all Maltese cinemas, ie. nationwide. Marcus1234 14:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:' Apologies, as you guessed, I misread the guideline. J Milburn 15:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In that case, we fall back on plain old Wikipedia:Notability, which is a generally accepted guideline and says that a topic should have multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in reliable sources in order to be considered notable. In simple terms, find two different newspaper articles about the movie, add them to the article, and I'd vote keep. Good luck, cab 14:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Done: [1] [2] Marcus1234 14:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep refs added by Marcus1234 cab 22:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment no opinion on the film, but maybe the clause in the guideline saying that nationwide releases must be of at least 50 theaters should be reinstated? It was deleted as redundant and confusing but this is the exact sort of case it was ment to cover. Eluchil404 11:18, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment But then movies released in small countries such as Malta wouldn't be listed. I think films released nationwide are inherently notable, irrelevant the size of the nation or the amount of theaters. Marcus1234 13:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am most certainly running off to Tokelau, Gibraltar, Clipperton Island, Pitcairn Islands, Ashmore and Cartier Islands, Spratly Islands, Coral Sea Islands, Monaco and that old favourite, Vatican City when I make a film. Surely one of them will have a theatre? In any case, multiple independant sources have been provided, and so I have withdrawn my nomination. I can't understand why this debate is still open. J Milburn 16:39, 26 January 2007 (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.