Talk:Stacked (film)

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 29 June 2022, see discussion.
keep, 16 January 2012 (UTC), see discussion.

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the British cinema task force.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Notability[edit]

These are all the sites I used. http://www.circularpictures.com/wordpress/bryony-ive http://www.channel4.com/programmes/stacked http://www.channel4.com/programmes/stacked/episode-guide/series-1/episode-1 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1262417/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Gillan http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2394794/ If that isn't enough proof that this film does exist, then I don't know what is.Androzaniamy (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The question is not whether the film exists; I believe it does. The question is whether it is notable. A site like IMDB has a goal of chronicling every film that exists, it does quite a good job, and Wikipedia does not need to duplicate it. Wikipedia is limited to things that are "notable", which largely means things that are noted - things that reliable third-party sources have talked about in a significant manner. You can see the notability guidelines for films at WP:NFILMS, and the general notability guidelines and WP:GNG; if it comes to a deletion discussion, those are the guidelines it will likely be measured against. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But I thought this was the encyclopedia that anyone can edit and not the encyclopedia that anyone can edit only if the subject is good enough for andministrators who only seem to delete things that newcomers have made and make unfair criticism on articles that are only a few minutes old.Androzaniamy (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit but that doesn't mean that every edit stays (as the edits can be edited); it does have its goals, guidelines, and procedures, and if this reaches the point of a deletion discussion, it will be the community involved in the discussion. I'm not an administrator, I'm a fellow editor; I believe that description is matched by the person who called for the Speedy Deletion of your previous posting.

If you check over at your talk page, you'll see that I just added a fuller standard "welcome" message to the end; there you will find various links that should help you understand editing Wikipedia, what is likely to be kept, what is likely to not, and how you can be most effective in helping us build this great resource! --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Androzaniamy: If you want the article to survive, you need to add references - not here on the talk page, but as part of the article. References which show that the film has received significant coverage in independent sources, and references to support the information you've given in the article. What competition? Who says so? etc. When was the film made? I'm not 100% sure that this ons is a WP:RS but it might be: http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/eureka-stacked-brocken-spectre-for-channel-4/1804624.article . PamD 21:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As someone pointed out at AfD, that URL leads to a paywall: if you google Stacked "channel 4" 2008 eureka it comes out as first hit, with full text. Weird. PamD 00:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is that weird. This film stars Karen Gillan for goodness sake and she is a very famous celribrity, I'll have you know. So this film is notable enough. Could someone remove the deletion message please? Androzaniamy (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion message will be removed once the discussion is over. Karl 334 ^{☞TALK to ME ☜} 17:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make arguments for this story being kept, the place to do it is on the deletion discussion page, rather than here. Having said that, the mere fact that it has a celebrity in it does not inherently make it notable, in Wikipedia terms. Notability is not inherited like that. If its sole import is in relation to Gillan's career, then the topic is best coverd in her article, rather than in a separate one. --Nat Gertler (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

Could somebody please explain how to make citations on an article as I apparently need then for this article? Androzaniamy (talk) 13:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Androzaniamy (talk • contribs) 13:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pity that you deleted the helpful information provided in a welcome message by Sparthorse. I'll replace it on your talk page now. PamD 14:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excerpts[edit]

Are sometimes available online for interested persons.[1]--Milowent • ^hasspoken 21:16, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]