Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle For America

Battle For America

Battle For America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

AFDs of articles created by the same editor

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hope and the Change
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Torchbearer (documentary)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle For America

--Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Poorly-sourced one sentence article about a non-notable film. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NFO. - MrX 🖋 10:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is literally just a listing for a utterly non-notable propaganda film., whipped up by an editor who's stated that he's doing it for promotion "The best part is if you get an article to 1500 chars you can get the article advertised on the Main page and in front of 17 million eyeballs" --Calton | Talk 11:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
• Comment You might also be interested that I had nominated his other article The Hope and the Change for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hope and the Change for the discussion. --Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 11:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 13:06, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.∯WBG^converse 13:35, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Binksternet (talk) 14:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
• Comment - at least one in-depth article at http://slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/10/blowing_up_stuff.html. It's also used as a repeated example in https://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc57.2016/-krzychStockFootage/2.html. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

  I found the first one, (in my search) but how's NFILM satisfied? ∯WBG^converse 15:36, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

  I was taking a look at Jump Cut whose activities include to profile these particular media stuff, from a narrow domain (along with other things) and me thinks, it hardly lends any additional credibility.Is it a good source to verify stuff? :--Yes. Is it a good source to demonstrate notability? :--No. ∯WBG^converse 15:39, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

  Probably so, which is why I just commented, instead of !voting. It didn't seem really notable, but those two articles made me wonder if it might sneak in under our definition. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:00, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

• Merge/redirect to Bannon--not sufficiently notable for a separate article, DGG ( talk ) 00:11, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
• Redirect to Steve Bannon. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:NF. The Slate article is good, but the column from The Washington Times isn't a reliable source because it's an opinion piece. I can't find any other reliable sources offering significant coverage. — Newslinger talk 19:30, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
• Delete as failing WP:NFILM. Ifnord (talk) 13:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

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.