Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Run Rincewind Run! - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 16:30, 4 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 16:30, 4 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. The Placebo Effect (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Run Rincewind Run!

Run Rincewind Run! (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete NN fanfilm. Fails to meet notability requirements of WP:NF. Previous PROD was contested on the grounds that Terry Pratchett appears in it. However, his was not a sufficiently major role to make the film notable per WP:NF Mayalld (talk) 08:34, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment as detailed above, WP:NF defines notability for films, and is explicit that notability is only inherited from a participant if he/she played a major role in the production. Pratchett's role was as a cameo. Whilst the film may (in your opinion), surely be notable, Misplaced Pages policy says otherwise. Mayalld (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete An 18 minute film made at a cost of $300 and shown at a fan convention grossly fails the Misplaced Pages standards for film notability. Edison (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Given that there is a source regarding this film, that makes the information about Pratchett's role in the film worthy of inclusion in the article of Terry Pratchett. However, as I'm unfamiliar with the film and mostly unfamiliar with Pratchett's work (I know of it), I can't say either way whether the film warrants its own article. I lean toward "probably not," but for now, having given my two cents, I'll abstain. LaMenta3 (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, fan film, doesn't pass notability. Terraxos (talk) 03:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, seemingly non-notable. Doctorfluffy (talk) 20:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


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.