Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mu Tunç

Mu Tunç

[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)

Fails WP:GNG. WP:REFBOMB and violation of WP:COI. All of the sources are promotional. Independent and reliable sources are needed for passing GNG. Kadı Message 21:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Authors, and Turkey. Kadı Message 21:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Özdemir, Gülçin, Berceste (2019) Türkiye'de Bağımsız Sinemaya Dair Tartışmalar Istanbul. Nobel Bilimsel Eserler ISBN 6056928764 may be acceptable, but only this source is not adequate for keeping this article too. Kadı Message 21:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination misrepresents the sources and appears to be the continuation of a personal content dispute related to BLP issues, which is specifically not a valid reason for deletion (see WP:BLPDELETE). AfD is not the appropriate venue for resolving disagreements about content.

The claim that “all sources are promotional” is factually incorrect. The subject is covered by multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources, including:

Academic publication: Özdemir & Berceste (2019), Türkiye’de Bağımsız Sinemaya Dair Tartışmalar, Nobel Bilimsel Eserler, ISBN 6056928764

(Academic sources by definition are NOT promotional and fully meet WP:RS.)

National media profiles and interviews

Film festival coverage

Cultural journalism

Independent industry commentary

These satisfy WP:GNG through significant, independent coverage over multiple years.

The article clearly meets the notability standards for creative professionals (WP:GNG, WP:NART, WP:BIO).

Deletion is not justified. Andreasfromparis (talk) 07:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, the tone and escalation of this nomination raise concerns related to Wikipedia’s guideline “Please Do Not Bite the Newcomers.”

The nomination and subsequent comments appear unnecessarily adversarial, and the use of AfD in the immediate aftermath of a BLP dispute risks discouraging constructive participation rather than resolving content concerns through normal editorial processes.

The article meets notability standards, has independent coverage, and can be improved rather than deleted.

Deletion is not appropriate. Andreasfromparis (talk) 07:14, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the points above, I would like to clarify that the article currently contains 58 independent, reliable references, including:

Major international media outlets from all around the world (Vogue US, VICE, I-D, Die Welt)

US cultural diplomacy sources (OneBeat / U.S. Cultural Department)

British, French, Australian, German, and Turkish national publications

Festival coverage across Europe and the U.S.

Cultural journalism, film criticism, and industry reporting

Academic coverage:

Türkiye’de Bağımsız Sinemaya Dair Tartışmalar, Nobel Bilimsel Eserler, ISBN 6056928764

These sources clearly fulfill the requirements of WP:GNG and WP:NART, which require significant, independent, reliable coverage. Academic sources alone meet WP:RS; combined with dozens of international media sources, the subject’s notability is not in question.

The suggestion that “all sources are promotional” does not align with the actual references listed on the page, which come overwhelmingly from independent and reputable outlets worldwide.

Given the breadth and depth of coverage across multiple countries and independent organizations, the article clearly meets Wikipedia’s notability standards and should be retained. Andreasfromparis (talk) 07:30, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You've provided strong opinions and described a range of sources, but it doesn't make for a particularly clear argument. A simple way to pass WP:NCREATIVE is to have multiple independently-notable works. Can you consult WP:NFILM and provide a list of 2+ works that meet the NFILM criteria, clearly stating which of the numbered criteria they meet and linking the relevant sources? ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:31, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep he has an IMDB page: [[1]] also there is this write up: Mu Tunç’s Cinematic Ode to Istanbul’s Punk History [[2]] and this one: 1990’lar İstanbulunda punk ve “Arada”: Mu Tunç [[3]]

and this one: Underground unter Erdogan [[4]] Agnieszka653 (talk) 21:40, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Agnieszka653, IMDB is not a reliable source, and the other links that you have provided are not independent sources; those are interviews with Tunç. Kadı Message 22:53, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]