Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbie Mariposa


 * 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. Elkman (Elkspeak) 18:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Barbie Mariposa

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable direct to video film that has not yet been released. Prod removed by article creator without comment.  Web H amster  20:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep While we generally discourage not-yet-released stuff, this one is far enough along that it's available for pre-order and supporting items (such as storybooks) are already out. I'll be pretty surprised if this turns out not to be released. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So what about its notability? It's a generic low budget kids film with nothing to demonstrate notability. -- Web H amster  21:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The prior movies in the series were all notable--bestselling, widely-reviewed, etc--so there's not much reason to imagine this one won't be as well. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So the notability aspect is now also a part of WP:CRYSTAL? -- Web H amster  21:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh? Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * If it's not notable now then how is is known that it will be notable later? Articles on films have to be notable now, not guessing that they may be notable later. I may be the world's largest lottery winner and become notable in 6 months so can I have my article now? Now don't forget WP:WAX before you answer. -- Web H amster  21:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The two aren't comparable because whether a movie is successful/notable isn't determined by random chance the way a lottery is. It's reasonable to assume that the next film in a (so far) notable series will also be notable.  Besides, being part of a notable series is in itself an indicator of notability. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Alas this is simply not the case as notability isn't inherited. Likewise notability has to be verifiable. If the film does not yet exist then how is that notability reliably verified. Obviously press releases can't be used, so how does a film which has not yet been released meet the criteria for film notability? Or more specifically, how does this one? -- Web H amster  18:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I like Starblind's argument. I also consider the subject notable enough for inclusion as a stub (with more to come once it's released), based on the sheer number of websites selling it on preorder   . Bottom line is that I don't feel a deletion will benefit Wikipedia in any way. -FrankTobia (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  00:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Every film in this series has been on a national best seller chart. It is not a violation of WP:CRYSTAL to believe this one will be also. Just like it is reasonable to assume that the next Harry Potter or Disney movie will be notable. Frog47 (talk) 17:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It still has to be verifiably notable does it not? So take away the studio's press releases and publicity drives and what are you left with? -- Web H amster  18:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with WebHamster's argument. In this case the "press releases and publicity drives," along with a little common sense and Google searching, can provide for temporary notability. Under his argument (virtually) no future products would have articles, which I think would hurt Wikipedia. -FrankTobia (talk) 20:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It already is listed as a best-selling DVD at Amazon.com, and that is simply on pre-sales 5 weeks prior to the release date. There is virtually no chance of it not charting upon release. Additionally, the star Kelly Sheridan is notable and the role of Barbie in this series is what she is best known for. Frog47 (talk) 05:49, 16 January 2008 (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.