Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finding Me: Truth

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 keep. Regarding the potential for a merge, a merge discussion can be continued on an article talk page. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Finding Me: Truth

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

Part of a rather spammy small walled garden around Finding Me. The original movie may be barely notable, this sequal doesn't seem to be notable at all. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 22:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no significant coverage in reliable independent sources. --Jakob (talk) 01:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Switch to keep per sources. --Jakob (talk) 17:31, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 03:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm trying to scratch out some sources, but offhand I think that both AfDs might end as a redirect to the main article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:29, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Finding_Me#Other_media. It ended up being pretty much what I expected: there was enough coverage to have a page for the first film and a mention of the followups in a subsection, but not enough for an individual article for each project. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:46, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~If no sourcing is readily available then merge to Finding Me. Sportfan5000 (talk) 21:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)~~ [WP:Ban 03:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)][reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It has enough coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG and thus WP:NF, some quite substantive in content. WP:SIGCOV is met. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] And to Tokyogirl79, merging this with the first film may be worth discussing on talk pages after a notable topic is kept. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 16:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per sourcing identified. Sportfan5000 (talk) 17:11, 5 March 2014 (UTC) [WP:Ban 03:52, 25 March 2014 (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.