Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Bug Man


 * 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 per independent coverage.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Big Bug Man

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This film doesn't seem to be set or a go anywhere. Most of the links given in the references section are dead, or are very early simple press releases, all related to Marlon Brando's allegedly voicing a small part. There is no listing at the IMDB for the film, or in any filmographies of supposedly connected actors. The actual film website is a very basic, seemingly amateurish site and no distribution company is noted.

The article fails WP:NF in that there is no distributor attached and it fails to meet any of the other qualifications in general principles of film notability. It should be deleted based on WP:NFF. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. It's a film that fails the film notability subcriteria, but that's irrelevant, since the refs (which I checked to make sure) pass this article under the primary notability criterion. Indeed, the film does seem to be headed nowhere, but that only means it needs updated references. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.   —Esn (talk) 18:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, or merge if this is not possible. There's enough coverage about the film for it to be notable even if it is never released, I think. My primary concern is that if it were merged into Marlon Brando, only a small amount of the detail in the article would make it through for stylistic reasons.  The details of Brando's last acting role are notable enough, and have been covered in enough secondary sources, so I think it's better to leave it up. Esn (talk) 07:55, 4 August 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.