Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HoMER Network: History of Moviegoing, Exhibition and Reception

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HoMER Network: History of Moviegoing, Exhibition and Reception

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

Fails WP:NORG the sources do not concern the subject of this article but are publications on the subject of hollywood audiences written by one of the founders of the network. Domdeparis (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Jack Frost (talk) 02:05, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most publications on this topic seem to be from people involved in the movement, and therefore not independent sources. It might make sense to expand the article on film studies with an account of recent developments including studies of audience and reception, which are becoming more popular.[1][2][3] (links include bibliographies) Topics like audience reception could also be expanded to cover film. But I'm at a loss for how best to proceed with this article (I think there have been pieces in some specialist publications on HoMER, but couldn't find much). --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:58, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No independent sources; all the references are self-referential. Maybe someday this group will come out with something to make them notable, but I'm not seeing any evidence of notability now. --MelanieN (talk) 02:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No independent coverage on article subject. 198.84.253.202 (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2018 (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.