Deletion of British silent horror

Comment: There is is no evidence here or at the article that British silent horror represents a "culturally significant phenomenon" as permitted by . Just compare the google hits for it to that for anime and manga (which can be described in simple terms as Japanese animation), which does qualify as a body of work with a unique identity and is subject to wide coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDIRECTORY)

Comment: While the first source (''Offscreen'') is one that validates this cross-categorization of three topics (British film, horror film, and silent film), I am hard-pressed to find this validation in the other sources. We do not have cross-categorization articles of any two topics (e.g., British silent film, silent horror film, or British horror film), so this seems borderline against  #6, ''"Cross-categories such as these are not considered a sufficient basis for creating an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon."'' I am aware that this article is not a list, but I think the same logic can apply to prose articles. Considering that the remaining sources are not actually used in the article, I cannot tell if they truly indicate that this cross-categorization is culturally significant any more than if it was a section in a higher-level cross-categorized article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:DIRECTORY)

Comment: The page lists seven sources and these seem quite good, such as ''https://offscreen.com/view/british_silent_horror The British Silent Horror Film and the First World War''.  The topic is therefore notable.   seems irrelevant as this is not a personal essay in that sense and, even if it was, it would not be a reason to delete a notable topic; we'd just tag the page for improvement per our |editing policy.  |AfD is not cleanup
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTESSAY||WP:IMPERFECT||WP:NOTCLEANUP)

Comment: OR mess, nothing apparently worth keeping, and, at least according to my understanding, the history of the genre classification "horror" makes the very concept of this article problematic, since (virtually?) no films were billed this way on initial release until much later, and so any Wikipedia article on the subject would need to be a lot more careful with citation of secondary sources, and clarification of what is meant by the "British silent horror", than this one is. It borders on  but the writing style of the article is also pretty abysmal: I find the no-doubt-accidental reference to lesbianism (and anachronistic reference to gay marriage) amusing, but if that's not a reason to delete the article it's certainly not a reason to keep it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTCLEANUP)