Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MDMAfilms

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:51, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MDMAfilms

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

Non-notable company lacking Ghits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:COMPANY. ttonyb (talk) 23:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Company is founded by NYTimes reviewed writer who has been profiled in dozens of national and international newspapers and magazines. A feature documentary of the company is on Bebe Zeva, who is a 17-year-old model who was profiled in Seventeen Magazine and Teen Vogue this month. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Churchhands (talk • contribs)

Delete Founded by so-and-so and did a documentary about so-and-so (even if these so-and-sos are in fact notable, which it's not clear they are) doesn't make a firm notable EEng (talk) 20:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete lacks gnews and ghits. The "Thought Catalog" source likely does not establish notability, both of the companies founders contribute there. (It's also somewhat unclear what their editorial policies are.) The second source does cover the subject, but the third appears to simply be some sort of directory listing. Being associated with famous people does not transfer notability. OSborn^arf_contribs. 00:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not notable enough for an WP article.--Bobbyd2011 (talk) 12:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per OSborn inter alia. A husband and wife pair of writers newly turned to films. I quote from Tao Lin's article here - "An article in The Atlantic described Lin as having a "staggering" knack for self-promotion" and "Another reviewer described it (Shoplifting from American Apparel) as "a vehicle...for self-promotion." (My brackets.) Thought Catalog does say in its About section, "Our content is always vetted and (most of the time) edited." I've just read through that transcript, and my first thought was to wonder if they had read it through themselves. (I recommend reading it, if you can manage to. I found it quite interesting, and decided as a result of my reading not to offer my good wishes for future success as I often do at AfD. I think it would be a waste of time.) If this achieves notability, I think a miracle will have happened. BTW, I have doubts about the notability of Megan Boyle - whose subject has had poems etc published in rather non-notable looking places, and whose debut collection is to be published by her husband's publishing venture. (Isn't that nice?) I'm just considering whether to CSD or AfD it. Tao Lin looks to have a better case for article status (if only for a review of his second book...). Peridon (talk) 13:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Megan Boyle article has been nominated at AfD now Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megan Boyle Peridon (talk) 21:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 19:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable film company that fails WP:CORP. Qworty (talk) 04:32, 2 February 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.