Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Good Time for a Dime

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. For WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy (talk) 16:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Good Time for a Dime

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable Donald Duck short from the 1940s. I couldn't find anything sourcing wise that would help it pass GNG. There is a trivial, passing mention of it in a book, but that's not enough IMO. Maybe the content could be merged somewhere, but I'm not sure where. Adamant1 (talk) 07:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. ProcrasinatingReader (talk) 08:27, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disney-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 17:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Toughpigs (talk) 17:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I added quotes from contemporary reviews of the film in The Film Daily and Motion Picture Herald. I also added material from Animating Culture: Hollywood Cartoons from the Sound Era by Eric Loren Smoodin (1993), which spends three and a half pages specifically analyzing both the "orientalism" and "male gaze" in this cartoon. This clearly demonstrates notability. — Toughpigs (talk) 18:11, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as meets WP:NFILM. Good additions by Toughpigs! DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:51, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep thanks to good ref finds from Toughpigs. Nothing wrong with having a stub article. -2pou (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the article has been significantly improved with the addition of content from multiple reliable sources as per WP:GNG, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:43, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as sufficiently notable. --Lockley (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All Donald Duck cartoons have been covered by dozens of books. A great number of sources can be added to this or any other Donald Duck/Walt Disney short if given the time. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2020 (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.