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 Keep after withdrawal of nomination. Any delete viewpoints have been changed in the light of sources found. (non-admin closure) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redwood Curtain (film)[edit]

Redwood Curtain (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non notable TV movie, fails WP:NOTFILM, prod removed with edit summary: "Removed to prevent sockpuppetry" Jezhotwells (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Jezhotwells (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Jezhotwells (talk) 20:42, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I found [1] and [2]. The play that this is based on is very notable in comparison. Joe Chill (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: In light of more sources. Joe Chill (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non-notable and incorrect article, as ABC has never aired any film in the Hallmark Hall of Fame series. Nate • (chatter) 23:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I stand corrected with deep sources now found, thank you. Nate • (chatter) 01:31, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Numerous sources about this film.[3][4] The first hit on Google Books is a substantial review in New York Magazine.[5] Per the sources, it was indeed aired on ABC.--Arxiloxos (talk)
• Keep per meeting WP:Notability (films). While being insulted when a deletion prod is removed might cause angst, such angst is no cause to nominate a notable topic that can be so easily improved. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:54, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and withdraw nomination, I apologise that my possible cursory survey of sources did not find those highlighted. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:24, 10 April 2011 (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.