Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Litman

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 delete‎. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 02:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Litman

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:AUTOBIO (see creator's username, as he didn't try very hard to hide) of a filmmaker not properly referenced as passing WP:CREATIVE. The attempted notability claim here is a long list of awards from small-fry film festivals -- but awards only clinch notability on their own if they come from top-level film festivals (Cannes, Berlin, Toronto, Venice, Sundance, etc.) whose awards get reported by the media as news, and do not secure a filmmaker's notability if they come from small local, regional or fake-award-mill film festivals where you have to rely on primary sources such as IMDb or the festival's own self-published marketing materials to footnote the claim because media coverage is nonexistent.
But even the rest of the article is still based mainly on a WP:REFBOMB of primary sources (films metasourced to their own presence on streaming platforms, YouTube videos, the self-published catalogues of film festivals that his films were screened at, etc.) with very little evidence of any WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about him or his films shown at all. Bearcat (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Canada, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I found the article draft when researching Actors Anonymous and built the article off there. Awards list has been removed but some do appear notable. Media coverage also appears legitimate/notable. Chinguman (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you identify which specific sources in the article count as GNG-worthy media coverage? I'm still just seeing primary sources. Bearcat (talk) 16:34, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Canvas Magazine, Pipeline Artists, JeanBookNerd, Oscars.org, Bain's Film Reviews, London Under 30, XFM News for filmmaker himself. And then plenty for filmmaker's work as well (Jetset Magazine, Crossfader, DreadCentral, Medium, Pasadena Community Foundation, Synthopia, Epic Heroes). Chinguman (talk) 04:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Canvas Magazine is a Q&A interview in which he's talking about himself in the first person, not journalism that's independently analyzing his work in the third. Pipeline Artists is a "staff" profile on the self-published website of an organiation he's a member of, not media. JeanBookNerd and Synthtopia and Bain's Film Reviews are blogs, not reliable or GNG-building media outlets. XFM is a college radio station in the subject's own hometown, which briefly mentions Litman's name without being about him in any sense, and thus doesn't help to build GNG because he isn't its subject. Medium is a user-generated blogging platform, not a GNG-worthy media outlet, and it fails to mention Litman's name at all. London Under 30 and the Pasadena Community Foundation are non-media organizations, not GNG-building media. And on and so forth. Bearcat (talk) 18:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I'm not able to find any substantial sources that aren't WP:PRIMARY or possibly pay-to-publish. The article also suffers from WP:PROMO so at the very least needs to be cleaned up. grungaloo (talk) 23:10, 29 March 2024 (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.