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 Livi Zheng. Sandstein 18:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Insight (2021 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable film, coverage of production is not significant, simply a listing of casting and notice of trailer release, has only been reviewed by two notable sources, per WP:NFO, two sources are supposed to indicate that there exists significant coverage of this film, but that has not shown to be true yet, this would be a good candidate for draftification to see if it does indeed receive significant coverage BOVINEBOY2008 23:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, passes WP:NFILM DonaldD23 talk to me 11:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NFILM requires significant coverage by independent sources. So far we have WP:RUNOFTHEMILL coverage (not significant) and two reviews. This does not meet WP:NFP. BOVINEBOY2008 13:26, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • RUNOFTHEMILL is simply an essay, not a policy/guideline. How many reviews do you feel equals "significant coverage"? DonaldD23 talk to me 14:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't think a number of reviews is a legitimate question. The more reviews a film has from nationally recognized critics, the more likely that the film has significant coverage. For a film that was released this year, the fact that only two articles and two reviews can be found online does not signal that this film has significant coverage IMO. BOVINEBOY2008 14:35, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Livi Zheng. The Film Creator (talk) 11:41, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Livi Zheng. Hypogaearoots (talk) 06:32, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It does seem like this film has enough coverage. Film reviews are exactly the types of sources you'd use for a page like this, not so much coverage of production. BuySomeApples (talk) 02:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, as it has enough coverage in the form of reviews to pass NFILM.Jackattack1597 (talk) 11:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Livi Zheng. Nothing to merge, it's a one line synopsis with a list of cast. I agree with BOVINEBOY's assessment that the subject fails WP:NFILM. Ifnord (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per above and WP:OUTCOMES. We have often redirected a film page to the director's article. Bearian (talk) 16:21, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the actor's article; there doesn't seem to be much content here, and there doesn't seem to be much sourcing around to write content based on. Perhaps at some later time, there will exist more, and it will bloom into being an article once again. jp×g 22:34, 23 August 2021 (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.