Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apparition (2013 movie)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:46, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Apparition (2013 movie)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This independent film appears to lack notability. A Google News search for ("apparition" "leesley") yields exactly one hit: this article. (Note that this is not the same as the 2012 film The Apparition; Google searches, etc., need to distinguish between the two.) A Google Web search for the same keywords produces no evidence of notice in independent sources: there are lots of hits, but they tend to be imdb.com, Facebook pages, or Leesley Films' own websites. Film has not yet been released: according to imdb.com, to be released in 2013. Currently fails WP:GNG, and in particular the standards at WP:MOVIE; running an article on the presumed notability of a small-company film to be released next year smacks of WP:CRYSTAL. Ammodramus (talk) 02:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - So far there is no indication that this film has any notability. As it is not out for some time yet, there is the possibility that it could become more notable upon its release, but its WP:TOOSOON for this article to exist.  Rorshacma (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ONEDAY; a search engine test shows that this is an amateur film with no coverage from reliable sources. It's possible that it could be notable given time and attention, but like WP:ONEDAY says, "Editors often protest the deletion of their articles on the grounds that their new idea is bound to take off and become popular soon, so why not have an article on it now? Sometimes they might be right, but other times they might not be, and once again there is no way for the reader to verify that their idea is going to be the next big thing." I would also delete the following categories also created by the article creator: Category:Films directed by James Leesley and Category:Films shot in Nebraska (U.S. state) (the latter which is redundant to Category:Films shot in Nebraska). Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFF. I prettied the thing up a bit before coming to this AFD. Good exercize.  Filming has apparently commenced, but has not yet been completed and the film not yet been released. Lack of any sort of coverage makes this article premature per WP:NYF. And as this is only the second film ever by James Leesley, a category for the filmmaker's projects is itself unneccessary. I would okay with it being USERFIED to article author User:Billiefan2000 for continued work over the next few months, but he/she really should be sent to WP:PRIMER and other help topics to understand what creates notability and our requirement for the availability of proper sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelQSchmidt (talk • contribs) 20:46, 20 September 2012 (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.