Deletion of One Night (2009 film)

Comment: won a few very minor awards. Not enough to meet either  or .  On another note, I was canvassed to come to this discussion by the article's creator, {{u|ZarhanFastfire}}. Please be aware that "inviting" people to join a discussion is not something you should generally do
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NFILM)

Comment: and '''flag for reference improvement'''. Yes, this could use a few more solid sources — but short films are routinely much harder to write long, highly sourced articles about than features are, because they don't get as many full reviews from film critics. Nevertheless, short films still can and do win significant notability-supporting awards and/or get designated as artistically or culturally significant, and can still pass  on that basis. Nominator is misrepresenting the significance of the film festivals in play here: WorldFest Houston is a long-established real film festival, not a PR-fraud operation, and Gimli is a major stop on the Canadian film festival circuit. (It is a Canadian Screen Award qualifying festival, for starters — and if you find it curious that Winnipeg ''doesn't'' have its own general film festival on the TIFF-VIFF-MWFF-CIFF-AFF-Cinéfest prestige tier despite being a major city that very much should have such a thing, but instead restricts itself ''solely'' to special interest and genre film festivals, well, "we don't want to undermine Gimli" ''is'' the ''reason''.)The notability test for films also does not depend on one user's ability or inability to find them on the internet, nor does it depend on the film's preexisting "fame". In fact, precisely the point of Wikipedia having film articles ''at all'' has at least as much to do with helping people find reliably sourced information about ''lesser-known'' notable films as it does with having articles about franchise blockbusters. And note that NFILM includes a criterion that extends notability based on ''archiving'', but does ''not'' include a criterion for "distributed on internet platforms like Vimeo or YouTube or Netflix or BitTorrent" — in other words, your ability to find it on the internet is not a notability criterion in its own right. Even completely ''lost'' films whose prints can no longer be found ''at all'', let alone on the Internet, can still be notable.So, granted, the podcast and IMDb sourcing isn't ideal and could stand to be replaced with better stuff if possible: but I do still count four genuinely |reliable sources here, which is quite enough
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFILM||WP:RS)