Her Painted Hero: I see various mentions showing that the film exists but I can't find the kinds of RS needed to show notability for inclusion.  JMWt ( talk ) 07:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  JMWt ( talk ) 07:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Keep!  First, although IMDb Is considered not reliable, the template No Sources should not have been added as one reference exists on the page ("You should only add this template to articles that contain no citations or references of any kind.").  But most of all sources exist (and are not that hard to find), as this article (in itself a blog) mentions.  See also this reliable database . (and dvd release ).  And significant coverage can be found in various books: this , this this , etc.  Willing to add those sources and more when it is kept.  Nota Bene: the film has a very notable cast and screenwriter, which contributes to its notability (please don't mention that notability is not inherited, as this is not what this sentence means).  NB2- International distribution (in French as Vermicel artiste peintre ). - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 12:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ok thanks for these sources.  The blog, the database and the dvd release are not suitable for assessing notability as they're not independent reliable sources.  The first book is a paragraph mention.  The second is a sentence.  The third is, perhaps, long enough to be considered as a source for notability.  In my opinion that is just one source that we can use to assess notability against the GNG.  JMWt ( talk ) 12:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you.  The blog is a blog but it is quoting (and reproducing) an article of The Moving Picture World , Jan. 16.  The NYT calls the film an "example of a curious movie phenomena ".  A book about Sennett mentions, in a whole rather interesting paragraph dedicated to the film, something that, imho, seals the deal: "Also of interest in Her Painted Hero is a previously undocumented appearance by Harold Lloyd ", which should be added to the article, something that, again, I am willing to do when I have more time.  Best, - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 13:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Lots of coverage in period newspapers.  [69] for example, in the Photoplay column, the review is the third in the list.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This one is also more extensive, fourth column from the left, third item down, near the middle.  [70] .  This one talks about Hale Hamilton, a local boy!  [71] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Oaktree.  Sources exist and the article can be expanded.  An early film is of general and historic notability.  Bookworm857158367 ( talk ) 15:22, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The film was written by Mack Sennett for his Keystone Studios.  I added a source and some info.   This film is part of a 50-movie pack : Comedy Classics DVD collection issued by Universal Studios in 2007.  — Maile ( talk ) 19:39, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per the reliable sources identified by Oaktree b as well as the book sources, so that together there is enough coverage to pass WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 22:54, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note to nominator: @ JMWt : Looks like a SnowBall.  Would you consider withdrawing this nomination so that we can speedy-keep the page?  Thank you. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 14:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No.  None of the provided refs pass the bar of "substantial" in my opinion.  Others may well decide that I'm wrong, but I don't withdraw.  JMWt ( talk ) 14:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - well-sourced.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 00:03, 26 October 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep