Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blood Ties: The Life and Work of Sally Mann

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. —SpacemanSpiff 07:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Blood Ties: The Life and Work of Sally Mann

Blood Ties: The Life and Work of Sally Mann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

This film was nominated for but did not win an Academy Award, nor apparently any other award. Coverage in reliable sources consists of incidental mention of its Oscar nomination. PROD was declined ("ANY film nominated for an Oscar is notable. added another ref"). The only sources for the article are a NY Times article, in which the film is listed but not commented on, and a music credit for R.E.M.. Fails WP:NFILMS, WP:GNG. Yappy2bhere (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

• Keep. I can't believe that any film nominated for an Oscar would be considered a candidate for uncontroversial deletion via PROD. More coverage exists, e.g. Allmovie, Variety, confirming the Oscar nom and Special Jury Award at the 1994 USA Film Festival, NY Times article discussing the Oscar nominees, Roanoke Times article mentioning the film (fairly brief mention before anyone else insists on pointing it out). Lacks a really long in-depth article about it, but the nomination and award mean that it's notable.--Michig (talk) 07:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep Any film nominated for an Oscar (even these minor categories) is notable. Thanks to Michig for finding more sources - I'll add them in once I get home from work (several sites blocked here!) Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 07:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Updated with those refs. Lugnuts (talk) 19:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep - I strongly concur with Michig and Lugnuts: the Oscar nomination, especially for a documentary, which typically get less coverage than feature films and therefore fewer chances for notability to be established, is a powerful indication of notability. Not only that, but the subject herself Sally Mann is without a doubt controversial and notable. This film should never have been brought to AfD. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep all Oscar-nominated movies are notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep obvious notability, waste of time to be discussing it here. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
• Keep Oscar nominated documentary (a rare enough event in itself) that has ample WP:V in Books and News. WP:SNOW closure anyone? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 18:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

"Rarity" isn't a criterion of notability, nor is an award nomination. Capsule reviews and plot summaries are specifically excluded as notable. No one has disputed that this short was nominated, so there's no point really to your Google results. You can't rent this film and you can't download it, so please don't pontificate about its obvious importance without demonstrating something more than that it exists. Yappy2bhere (talk) 03:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

The importance is inherent in its subject, and the acknowledgement by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science of its quality (a nomination is, in its own way, a significant honor, because so few films are nominated). "Rarity" is, in fact, the very reason why we pay attention to awards and nominations: because so few films receive them. The more prestigious the award, the fewer the films that are in line to get them, and that selection carries with it notability.

On the other hand, the commercial status of the film is irrelevant to the question of its notability, so I'm not sure why you bring it up. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Quite so. The "rarity" of an event, per WP:N, can most definitely make something "worthy of note"... and the nominator's inability to purchase or download the documentary has absolutely nothing to do with WP:N. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

"You can't rent this film and you can't download it" - WHAT?! You're not being serious and using that as an arguement for deletion?! Heaven help 80% of films made before 1927. Not only was this documentary nominated for an Oscar, but it was screened at several film festivals (WP:NFILM#2) and won a Jury Prize at one of them (WP:NFILM#3). Lugnuts (talk) 13:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

• Keep as per everyone but nominator. Edward321 (talk) 04:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
• Strong keep Clearly meets guidelines and has many reliable sources. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ^ΨMonastery 10:17, 16 February 2010 (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.