Talk:I due evasi di Sing Sing

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted for the following reasons. It was indeed deleted after AFd. But the rationale for SD states the page is "substantially identical to the deleted version, and any changes do not address the reasons for which the material was delete". Both assertions are not true. As a quick look at the history of the page shows. Changes have been quite substantial. Sources and content proving notability have now been provided. I've asked User:78.26 (thanks again) to provide me with the deleted text to rework it, after having mentioned the issue at Deletion review, where I was told I could draftify it, and although I didn't technically draftfy it, it can uncontroversially be said it amounts to exactly just the same. User:Primefac (thanks again) proceeded to history merge. So it is not a wild/stealthy recreation to bypass Afd decisions. Quite the opposite. To go again through Afd just for the sake of going trough Afd would be a waste of time. Also, User:Onel5969 who requested this Speedy deletion (the same user had put a Notability tag back in December 2022, although this film was obviously NOT reasonably likely non notable even at the time) could have at least informed me he was making such a request.......I'll have a word with him in the meantime.... — MY, OH, MY! 14:53, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

B/W

My recent edit summary contains an incorrect link to the explanation for the mention in the intro that the film is in b and w. Here's the correct link. — MY, OH, MY! 20:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)