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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC) reply

Feature Films for Families

Feature Films for Families (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Has received some coverage, but not enough to qualify for a standalone article as per WP:CORPDEPTH. Many sources found via searches only provide passing mentions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete I agree with op. References fail the criteria for establishing notability, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND, topic therefore fails GNG and WP:NCORP. -- HighKing ⁺⁺ 15:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SIGCOV. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 06:25, 7 November 2017 (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.