Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Umbrella Entertainment

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. If somebody feels the need to re-create this as a redirect, that's fine, but I don't see any consensus here to do that, so I'm not making that part of the close. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:58, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrella Entertainment

Umbrella Entertainment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No independent evidence of notability, most significant contributions appear to have come from related parties. Scott Davis ^Talk 11:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Scott Davis ^Talk 11:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Scott Davis ^Talk 11:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to List of film distributors by country#Australia. It exists, but I could not find more than passing mentions in search results to establish notability. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 12:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per Erik and WP:CHEAPDelete: I tried looking for WP:CORPDEPTH type coverage, but couldn't really find anything that came close other than an If Magazine article that I added as an external link. There's lots of primary sources and press releases, and even perhaps so WP:UGC type film fan website coverage, but most of it seems to be more about the movies the company are releasing than the actual company itself. Whatever COI editing there might have been seems to have been cleaned up pretty well, but it's the problem with WP:NCORP that might be too hard to overcome. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've changed !vote to "delete" after further consideration. While I can understand the argument in favor of redirecting this, simply adding a WP:REDLINK to a list article is not really good practice per WP:CSC unless there's a real possibility of a viable article being created per WP:REDYES. I've tried to find something which might reasonably indicate such a thing, but haven't; so, I think that at best this is a case of WP:TOOSOON, but most likely is a case of WP:NRV. All of the other entries in List of film distributors by country do seem to have their own stand-alone articles (maybe some shouldn't) and it would seem like a bad idea to start doing so just for this company. So, unless a better target article for a redirect can be found, I think that this shouldn't really be kept. A good target article for redirecting this would perhaps be an article about the company's founder Jeff Harrison, but he, like the company, doesn't appear Wikipedia notable in his own right to support a stand-alone article. So, unless there are particular notability criteria specific to this type of company, I don't see it meeting the more general NCORP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect I was unable to find any reliable source about the company, rather than the movies. I was indecisive about redirect - the list doesn't include redlinks or unlinked distributors, but there a couple of hundred links that would turn red by a delete, inviting an editor to recreate the article. Find bruce (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DGFA#On deleting pages#9 says that if the article is deleted and shouldn't be expected to be recreated, the links should be removed too. I have not looked carefully at whether the (unlinked) text is useful to keep or whether the link should be completely removed in most cases. Are film distribution company articles ever useful and well-referenced? --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:13, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Scott Davis, on that basis I have struck my support for redirect - if a reader followed that link they would expect to find something about the film distributor, not other unrelated film distributors. I haven't been through every link, but a broad sample shows them to be along the lines of (1) "... was released on DVD by Umbrella Entertainment in ..." eg Green Card (film), (2) incuded in a table eg List of films banned in Australia or (3) included in an infobox eg Not Quite Hollywood. Each of the ones I have looked at would appear to be useful if the unlinked text was kept. Find bruce (talk) 03:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Find bruce/Marchjuly. Lupin VII (talk) 05:18, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into Madman Entertainment as a separate section, with heavy cuts. There was some association between the two, see this for example. They have been involved in the distribution of a lot of arthouse/foreign DVDs in Australia. Meticulo (talk) 02:52, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge as above as does have some rs coverage such as if magazine Atlantic306 (talk) 21:34, 15 September 2019 (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.