Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Encounter (2018 film)

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. Consensus is that there is sufficient sourcing to establish notability. (non-admin closure) gobonobo ^{+ c} 12:30, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Encounter (2018 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 film, never took off beyond the "a hemsworth brother is starring!" and announcements about its filming, didn't seem to get any major critical reviews or coverage, so just another run of the mill film. CUPIDICAE💕 23:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to Luke Hemsworth: to give you an idea of the lack of coverage here, there are literally zero almost zero reviews aggregated on Rotten Tomatoes (which sets a lower bar for inclusion than the WP bar for notability) Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The article has two working references that talk about the film before they started filming it https://variety.com/2017/film/news/luke-hemsworth-to-star-in-twilight-zone-inspired-sci-fi-drama-encounter-1202033848/ https://www.wrdw.com/content/news/Sci-fi-film-Encounter-to-begin-filming-next-week-throughout-Augusta--419425834.html I don't see any coverage of the film when it was completed. Dream Focus 01:00, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I saw three reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, all of which are from RS. I'll add them to the article. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:23, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't think the YouTube guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omCJJ0zOZ4c is a reliable source. Film Threat and Alex Saveliev seem to be. That review is on two pages https://filmthreat.com/reviews/encounter/ and https://filmthreat.com/reviews/encounter/2/ flickeringmyth.com gets 101 Wikipedia search results and "flickering myth" between quotation marks gets 430. So a lot of articles reference them. https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2019/09/movie-review-encounter-2019/ That's two reliable sources giving significant coverage to this film. Dream Focus 04:35, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I added him because of the content in Jackie K. Cooper - he looked to be a notable critic, but glancing at the sourcing in his article I am a little concerned that it seems to be largely primary. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per my improvements to the page. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ReaderofthePack Can you elaborate on what new sources show notability? All I see is an additional press release from the terribly unreliable Statesman and the same announcements I pointed out in my nom, which do not in the slightest contribute to notability - "it's filming" "is starring" isn't coverage, those are press releases. CUPIDICAE💕 13:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• The notability stems from the reviews, which are considered a sign of notability per WP:NFILM. I wasn't aware that the Statesman wasn't a RS on here, so I've removed it from the article. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree then, he is notable too. Rotten Tomatoes thinks so and he has a Wikipedia article showing him as a notable reviewer. Dream Focus 04:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apologies, for some reason the landing page claimed there were 0 reviews. I don't think these are particularly notable though. Gnomingstuff (talk) 08:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It may have been marginal before, but thanks to the kind efforts of ReaderofthePack, there are now enough decent citations. Edwardx (talk) 09:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as secondary sources have been found. Daranios (talk) 08:28, 22 February 2021 (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.