Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Straitjacket Lottery

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Straitjacket Lottery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Another non-notable film article created by Matzonyc. Editor created the Doug Karr article in 2008, and articles for some Karr-produced films, all non-notable - and the account created nothing else. Purely self-promotional. Argles Barkley (talk) 22:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Argles Barkley (talk) 22:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete IMDB, Google, News, Scholar, and Books create no results, this is so obscure that it doesn't have an RT article. VickKiang (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the nominator and VickKiang. Nowhere close to passing WP:SIGCOV. No indication of notability whatsoever. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 00:55, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Films are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist — the notability test for films requires some evidence of significance, such as notable film awards and/or critical analysis by professional film critics in media. But there's none of that here, and even on a ProQuest search for 18-year-old coverage that might not have googled I still only get a couple of glancing namechecks of its existence in event calendar listings, which isn't enough. His BLP generically claims this won "multiple awards", but both it and this fail to state or source which awards so that we could establish whether they were notable ones or not — we're only interested in awards that can be shown to get media coverage to establish their notability, and not just every single film award that exists on earth — and even the film's IMDb profile just lists a couple of minor non-notability-making awards as "trivia" (like a script development award) rather than in a standard awards section, which means those awards aren't "inherently" notable enough to exempt this from having to have sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2022 (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.