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 redirect to Greydon Clark. MBisanz ^talk 00:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Sight, Out of Mind (film) (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)

Does not meet any of the 5 criteria for notability listed at Wikipedia:Notability_(films)#Other_evidence_of_notability ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Greydon Clark - Unfortunately, I am voting redirect as a result of the few significant sources I have found. Google News archives provided several results but all of them appear to be newspaper listings, which would support the "cast" details but not significant such as reviews or other extensive coverage. I wish a plot could have been added to slightly improve the article but I'm not familiar with this film. Google Books also provided results that were mainly directories and listing the same content as Google News. SwisterTwister talk 19:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The notability requirements say specifically that a directory listing is not enough. General reviews are not enough either unless they are by national criticsReformedArsenal (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually "nationally known" is a subjective term, and as such are always open to interpretation. "General reviews" would be enough if they were from sources expected to be those that cover the independent horror film genre. We do not expect nor demand that such be covered by such as Roger Ebert, just so long as they did receive coverage by those sources accepted as reliable and neutral. As the film had releases in other languages, we do better to look further afeild for coverage, rather than limit ourselves to only the problematic find sources set by the AFD template. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was using "national critic" in opposition to "local critic." That is, Jim Bob reviewing it in the Ames, IA gazette doesn't qualify.ReformedArsenal (talk) 14:29, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Local" can also be a subjective term... and even then could be used for policy required verifiability of a topic, even if not toward establishing notability. Actual examples would be evaluated individually if/when presented. Looking beyond presumptions is one of the resasons I pointed out this film has had international distribution in non-American countries... and if found and offered, non-English reviews in Italian, French, or Finish would be perfectly fine for us at en.Wikipedia. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:57, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AKAs:

UK video: (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)[1]

UK video: (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)[2]

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

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

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

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I found news coverage in the Washington Times and the St. Louis Dispatch, but it was trivial at best: a listing and a plot blurb in each case. Looking through the other sources, I haven't been able to find anything that would push it past the WP:GNG significant coverage threshold or meet the WP:NFILMS criteria. --Batard0 (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 22:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Firsfron of Ronchester 03:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Greydon Clark. There appears to be a review here. It doesn't come up when searching the book, but the Google snippet says "OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF HER MIND (1989) * Horror director Greydon Clark is back with a tale of the Kabuki Killer and how this antisocial guy terrorizes Susan Blakely after he burns her daughter alive. Wings Hauser plays Blakely's husband ...". I cannot find anything else of substance, but I do get the impression that it is notable enough and that there could be offline sources from the 1989-90. Redirect to the director's article as per usual practice and in the interest of preserving the information, in hope that additional sources might be found in the future — Frankie (talk) 20:23, 2 November 2012 (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.