Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comanche Stallion (2nd nomination)


 * 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   redirect to Harry Carey, Jr.. I think this is the best judgement I can make based on the discussion - the article should not exist as a standalone, but there seems no objection to including the material in an appropriate biography section. In order to allow a merge I have to preserve the history, so I am setting this up as a redirect. This will also facilitate article spinout if Michael Schmidt is correct. Any concerns or comments about this close, please contact me Fritzpoll (talk) 12:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Comanche Stallion
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has been up for AfD twice before (see also Articles for deletion/Comanche stallion), with one "keep" and one "no consensus" result. I am bringing it up again because the article claims that this movie was released March 5, 2005 -- but there is serious reason to doubt that it was ever released at all, and I have found no reliable sources to explain what happened to it. That is, I can't figure out whether filming was never completed, or whether post-production was never completed, or whether the producers were unable to secure a distributor, or what.

As evidence against the idea that the film was released on March 5, 2005, I note that the Internet Movie Database shows no external reviews, no newsgroup reviews, and no user comments. Rotten Tomatoes, a site that compiles movie reviews, doesn't even have an entry for Comanche Stallion. Box Office Mojo doesn't have an entry either, meaning that no box office grosses for it are known to them. And in an era when theatrical films normally make it to DVD within 4 months, this film hasn't been released on DVD in 4 years. A look at the film's own web site shows an unusually low amount of information for a film which allegedly has been released.

There is also a disconnect between the plot and the characters. The only character specifically named in the "Plot" section is General Marcus Lathrop, but nobody is identified as playing Lathrop in the "Cast" section. Although James Arness is listed as playing an "Adjutant General", his role is listed as a voice role only on IMDb (consistent with his comments on his own site), and it would be unusually postmodern to have him playing the main character without actually appearing on screen. Furthermore, no more than five of the actors in the film are listed in any source I can find.

And what about the cast and crew members' personal web sites? Well, James Arness mentioned in November 2003 that he recorded the voiceover narration for the film, but he doesn't list the movie in his filmography even though his site has been updated as recently as February 2009. Harry Carey Jr., who is both one of the stars and a producer of the film, doesn't mention it at all on his official site, although that site may not have been updated for several years. Hechter Ubarry doesn't list the film on his resume, even though he lists the 2006 release 16 Blocks there. And co-director Clyde Lucas's bio on his web site says "As of this writing, Carey (producing) and Lucas (directing) are working on a new action western, titled Comanche Stallion" -- between two other entries dated 2008.

Admittedly, it is possible for a film to be notable without being released or even finished -- see Category:Unfinished films -- but in most cases, the articles have sources that explain what happened to the project. In this case, I haven't found any such sources. Until we know the real status of this film, I don't think we have enough information to justify an article, and consequently it ought to be deleted. Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, per Metropolitan90 fairly exhaustive research and WP:V. It seems like this film was never created or even really entered production. It seems like it was nothing more than an unrealized idea. Even the "official" site is sketchy and doesn't look like it is even a legitimate official site, though it is registered to "7th Voyage Productions" whoever they are.-- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —--  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. There's no acounting for Rotten Tomatoes, but like IMDB they are not a database for every film ever made. More pointedly, IMDB's lack of informations should not be taken as a deficit... specially since Wiki does not feel it is reliable for anything but the barest of WP:V. Arness's participation is easily confirmed by the Sun Sentinel inteview and Movie Actors, though I cannot imagine why someone nearly 90-years-old might not put it on his website... yet... even after his participation was confirmed in interviews. The film is confirmed as released by Hollywood.com, Cinema Theiapolis (with cover art), IMDB, Mooviees, Top Ten Reviews, Movie Zen, Vicdir, IGN, Cinema.com, KinoPoisk, Popcorn Confessions, Buy Indian, Trailerfan, LAMP, bk.pps, Film Reference, MrMovie, HuDong, Buddy TV, Hollywood Collectors Show, B Monster, CNMDB, TAGSRWC, CinemaRX, Available Images, 7th Voyage Productions, Quizmoz, Syndicated Journalist, Fuzzster, Hollywood Up Close, Mov6, Jerri Blank, Most Wanted Movies, Come on Hollywood, DukeWayne.com, Film Web, New York Times, dy.com and dozens and dozens more.... and appears to be downloadable at Now Torrents, Sumo Torrent, BT Junkie... so did this go direct-to-video and then was pulled out of release? Kind tough to crystal ball that one. But it is WP:Verified that it was made and it more than surpasses WP:GNG for backgound, history, cast, and crew. And its quite notable in and of itself that a bunch of old duffers shook off the cobwebs and got together, 30 years after their primes, to make one last film. I would welcome further research and expansion of this notable film, I do not believe the questions posed by the nom are best answered by a deletion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm not sure whether to consider this a hoax or just one of the many thousands of movies that get proposed but don't actually get made. I think I can say with certainty that the movie described wasn't released though, and whether it ever got past the idea stage is anyone's guess.  There's a fairly long interview with Carey here, dated November 2005, and not only does he not mention Comanche Stallion even once, he specifically says that his last movie "...was with Tom Selleck about 10 years ago."  If he'd released another one a few months before he would have mentioned it. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Harry Carey himself spoke about the film and it being his last HERE and again in an interview HERE.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The IGN piece is dated 2004, and the video has no particular date and is hosted on the questionable Comanche Stallion site. And if the movie was actually made, why doesn't the video show footage from it?  Simply put, I can't believe a movie from a big western star like Carey and with a John Ford connection could be released and not even get a single review, anywhere.  Variety reviews virtually every commercially-released motion picture.  And not even 5 people have seen it and rated on IMDB?  Let's face the facts here, this movie may be or may once have been in some stage of conception/production, but it hasn't been released, in 2005 or otherwise. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not believe the video clip where Carey spoke of CS as being a hoax and it is hosted on the film's official website... and calling the official website "questionable" may be a bit harsh as it is the official site put up by the production company. I am in agreement with concerns over what might have happened to the film. I am quite willing to post questions at the websites of the various principals to find out what happened if no one else cares to do so.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep per the exhastive research done by Michael, artile is already well researched.Ikip (talk) 23:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Metroppolitan99 has doen some great research himself, and his concerns are laudable. I just don't think they will be addressed by a deletion, when they might with copyedit within the WP:DEADLINE set by wiki to do so.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. I would like to address a few of the concerns raised in this discussion. I never said that Comanche Stallion was a hoax and I don't think it is one. Rather, I think it is a project which was intended to be a film, which got cast, which got some publicity and became listed in various databases, but which may not actually have made it into release. I read James Arness's comments on his web site, and I do believe that James Arness went into a recording studio more than five years ago and recorded narration for Comanche Stallion. However, it is not certain that the filmmakers succeeded in filming, editing and releasing two hours of movie to accompany that narration, although they planned to do so. As to the sources which confirm the film's release, not all of them even purport to do that. For example, Hollywood.com lists the film's status as "announced", not released. So does the New York Times. (If we consider the NYT a reliable source, that should be enough to lead us to believe that the film was not released.) The IGN item is an interview with Harry Carey Jr., published in 2004, in which he describes Comanche Stallion as his next project. BMonster is an item published in 2003 which states that Carey "is mounting a production" of Comanche Stallion. Buy Indian says Carey "is now producing" the film. TAGSRWC was published in 2004 and describes Comanche Stallion as "in the works". Several of the other sources cited by MichaelQSchmidt are database entries with minimal information which appear to have copied IMDb and/or each other. As to the torrent sources, I do not download films from torrent sites myself so I will have to rely on other editors to report on whether those sites really do have this film. BT Junkie does not purport to have it. But one thing that would really help confirm the film's completion and release is a reliable source indicating that someone has seen it and evaluated it as being good, bad, or indifferent. So far, I have not found one of those. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I wish MQS's commendable work ethic could be directed more, and that his summaries of links could be less misleading. Having a year in parentheses after a film's name is not a confirmation of release. Anyone who thinks otherwise should ask the question at Wikipedia Talk:Verifiability. This film satisfies neither the general notability guideline nor the notability guidelines for films. But before I bother with that, I will go through (in unfortunately tedious detail) the shortcomings of the laundry list of putative evidence for the theatrical release of the film.
 * First, it should be noted that many of the sources cannot be considered to be reliable sources. But even assuming they are, here are the facts about what they do and do not say about Comanche Stallion:
 * Sun Sentinel interview. Passing mention of movie only (doesn’t describe nature of role, no confirmation of release).
 * Movie Actors. Passing mention only (doesn’t describe nature of role, no confirmation of release).
 * Hollywood. om. No confirmation of release. 
 * Cinema Theiapolis. Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * IMDB. Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Mooviees. No confirmation of release.
 * Top Ten Reviews. No confirmation of release.
 * Movie Zen. Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical. 
 * Vicdir. Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * IGN. No confirmation of release. 
 * Cinema.com. No confirmation of release.
 * KinoPoisk (Russian). Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Popcorn Confessions. Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Buy Indian. Link to official website. No material information on movie.
 * Trailerfan. No confirmation of release.
 * LAMP. No confirmation of release.
 * bk.pps (Chinese). Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Film Reference. No confirmation of release.
 * MrMovie. Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * HuDong (Chinese). Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Buddy TV. No confirmation of release.
 * Hollywood Collectors Show. No confirmation of release. 
 * B Monster. No confirmation of release.
 * CNMDB (Chinese). Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * TAGSRWC. No confirmation of release.
 * CinemaRX. Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Available Images. No confirmation of release.
 * 7th Voyage Productions. No confirmation of release. 
 * Quizmoz (trivia quiz). Suggests release in 2006. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Syndicated Journalist. No confirmation of release.
 * Fuzzster. Suggests release date of March, 2005. Does not specify theatrical.
 * Hollywood Up Close. No confirmation of release.
 * Mov6. No confirmation of release.
 * Jerri Blank. No confirmation of release.
 * Most Wanted Movies. No confirmation of release.
 * Come on Hollywood. No confirmation of release.
 * DukeWayne.com (forum). No confirmation of release.
 * Film Web (Polish; appears to be a forum). No confirmation of release.
 * New York Times. No confirmation of release.
 * dy.com (Chinese). No confirmation of release.
 * dozens and dozens more. Do we need to look further?
 * However, the release or non-release of the film is not the main issue. Rather, there is no evidence that this film has received non-trivial coverage in reliable independent sources. See this Google news archive search for example.
 * Likewise, the subject-specific notability guidelines are not met.
 * No full-length reviews in large circulation newspapers or from nationally know critics.
 * Not historically notable (not old enough to meet criteria).
 * No awards.
 * Not archived.
 * Not taught at a notable film program.
 * Of course, there are alternate criteria:
 * Not a "unique accomplishment".
 * Not a "major part of the career" of any of the notable people attached (by any normal definition of "major part of a career").
 * Not produced in a country that is "not a major film producing country".
 * So. It seems pretty cut-and-dried. Hard to see what all the fuss is about. Bongo  matic  02:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly. What is the fuss? Even you acknowledge that WP:NF allows notability for "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career"... and it being the final feature film of the writer/director/producer, kinda makes it both a "unique" and "major part" of Carey's career, as despite his incredible 53 year career as an actor, this is his first, last and only feature film as writer/director. This does kinda show notability and signifcance. Or am I totally nuts? (don't answer that last).  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * While this may be a minor point, I don't think I've seen any sources that refer to Carey as a director on this film. At least, the IMDb does not list him as such, nor has he been identified as a director on the film's page any time recently. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per Bongomatic's thorough analysis of the available sources. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 05:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Has any attempt been made to contact any of these seniors to find out about their film? Apparently they get to their respective website every so often, and confirmations might put this all in perspective, if one is seek a source other than the internet. And can this be done within the WP:DEADLINE set by this AfD? .  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The repeated reference to WP:DEADLINE (an essay&mdash;not even a guideline&mdash;that is literally ambiguous in its implication) is not apt even if you take View two as articulated therein to be the real meaning. This is because, notwithstanding your own views on what does and doesn't belong in this encyclopedia, according to the standards set out in the well-agreed notability guidelines, this film has had its "lack of significance ... unambiguously established."
 * As alluded to (but perhaps not spelled out in sufficient clarity) in my comment above, who did what on this film doesn't actually help satisfy either the general or the film-specific notability criteria. Bongo  matic  06:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Repeating in case it was missed. WP:NF allows notability for "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career"... and it being the final and ONLY feature film of the writer/director/producer, kinda makes it both a "unique" and "major part" of Carey's career, as despite his incredible 53 year career as an actor, this is his first, last and only feature film as writer/director. This does kinda show notability and signifcance. Even if release is indeterminant, sources in the article do show it was made. That he is almost 90 pretty much indicates that his own comment about it being his last might be taken as gospel. Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The relevant wording at WP:NF, which you quoted is "major part of his/her career". While you may be convinced that the factors you mention make this such a "major part", my view is that a movie with extremely limited if any theatrical release, and no significant reviews or other coverage, can not be said to be a "major part of" someone's career. I don't read this criterion to be one about the notable person's psychology, but whether objectively, it is a major part of someone's oeuvre. Bongo  matic  06:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So you believe that first, final and ONLY feature film of Carey as a writer/director/producer after a 53-year carrer as an notable actor, is not then itself notable? Or is it that you believe that B Monster, IGN, The Morning Call, Animal Movies Guide, International Television & Video Almanac, Contemporary Theatre, Film and Television: A Biographical Guide (page 89) are evidences that it was made but not that it had wide release? And it is that wide release you wish and not that it can be WP:Verified as the first, last, and only for this man?  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why you keep raising these links as evidence of anything:
 * B Monster: "Carey, son of one of the screen's legendary cowboys and veteran of several Ford classics, will produce and star in 'Comanche Stallion,' based on the 1958 novel by Tom Millstead." No statement that it actually was produced, let alone distributed.
 * IGN: "9. What is your next project? Comanche Stallion. This will be my last Western and a film John Ford wanted to make. 10. What is the one project that you've always wanted to do, but have yet to be able to? Comanche Stallion since 1963." No statement that it actually was produced, let alone distributed.
 * Animal Movies Guide: "Comanche Stallion. 2005, western and fantasy. A band of treasure-seekers (James Arness, Harry Carey, Jr., Robert Carradine, Rance Howard, and Hechter Ubarry) are on a quest to find the fabled Comanche Stallion (played by Wings) whom the Native Americans consider to be a mystical, lucky&mdash;and unattainable&mdash;horse." No suggestion of wide or theatrical release.
 * South Florida Sun-Sentinel "Arness, now almost 85, had a role in a 2006 movie titled Comanche Stallion." No suggestion of wide or theatrical release.
 * International Television & Video Almanac. The little context does not appear to make provide evidence of wide or theatrical release.
 * Contemporary Theatre, Film and Television: No preview available.
 * Again, not that it matters. The lack of notability comes from the general and subject-specific criteria. Bongo  matic  08:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment And again, it matters quite a lot, as the notability does indeed come from the general and subject-specific criteria... but just not to you. You seem to have (quite reluctantly) agreed that at least three of the sources confirm the film's completion, even though none confirm its release. I ask that you not be so dismissive of them as they quite explicitely show notability in this case.
 * B Monster confirms intent to make the film
 * James Arness interview confirms fil as having at one point been in production
 * IGN confirms intent to make the film
 * Animal Movies Guide confirms film was made
 * South Florida Sun-Sentinel confirms film was nade
 * International Television & Video Almanac confirms film was made
 * None confirm the film as released. So what? It does not matter PER GUIDELINE.
 * Let's take the repeated ad-naseum contention that the film has not been released: WP:NFF indicates that films "...not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." This brings us right back to WP:NF and "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career" and my contention that as the first, last and only film written and directed by a notable individual, it most specifically meets criteria of the production being notable... even without the film being released. Thank you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. In a nutshell, then the debate can be boiled down to this. Does this file represent at "major part of" the career of anyone involved. MQS says "yes". I say "no". In support of MQS's arguments, he relies on subjective criteria about uniqueness and singularity. In support of my argument, I point out that this film is so minor that it cannot be considered to be a "major part" of anyone's career. It would be helpful if other commentators can refer to this specific difference when opining further. Bongo  matic  09:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment to clarify that "nutshell": As long as this film can be considered a unique milestone in a notable contributor's career... released or not... blockbuster or not... it has has earned its notability under current guideline... as being the first, the last, and the only film writen and directed by notable personage Harry Carey Jr.. Like Bongomatic, I invite a fresh perspective, as maybe WP:NFF needs to be drastically rewritten.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 10:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not sure by what measure it can be considered a "milestone" if nobody has seen it, Carey hasn't mentioned it in subsequent interviews, and it very possibly doesn't even exist. And nothing says Carey directed it, either.  The bottom line is that even the most basic facts about this film aren't supported by reliable sources: if it was made, who made it, if it was completed, if it was released, and if so how it was released, or even if it exists. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Guideline does not require that it have been released. Simple. Returning to that argument ignores both the guidelines of WP:NFF "...not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines", and the guidelines of WP:N "The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career". Further what sources have been provided, including RS interviews with James Arness, show that the film HAD been in production. Of course, if the argument is being made that is is NOT unique and notable by being the first, last, and only feature film written and directed by Carey, released or not, then it's time to rewrite guideline... because current guideline specifically supports its notability. I hope the closing admin makes note of repeated arguments that contradict guideline by essentially saying "If no one's seen it, it ain't notable."  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

COMMENT I wrote to Harry Carey Jr. and this morning received a personal response. Mister Carey himself told me they ran out of funding toward completion and that he was now at nearly 90, too old and tired to actively market his project. This is a disappointment to me, as such a piece would/will become part of American film hitory for what it represented and for who was involved and why. I include "will" in my last sentence because as part of his legacy, and in my understanding of how "Hollywood" works, the film will undoubtedly be completed... even if done as a memorial of his legacy to the industry and the American Western genre. That said, if deleted, I will rewrite and merge the informations as a sourced portion of the Harry Carey Jr. article, marking a major accomplishment of his life, when he wrote and directed his first film. And when the film is finally finished and released (sadly and most likely after his death), the information can be spun out into a resurrected article on the film.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bongomatic. Wether B (talk) 01:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Michael, thanks for looking into this. It is regrettable that Carey was unable to complete the project due to a lack of funds but I appreciate your investigation. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes... well, it kinda broke my heart. It still has significance under WP:NFF for unreleased films, but can become a historical section on Carey's page. I'd be proud to add it myself in the event of a deletion... and in that case, a redirect will suffice for the title if deleted and protect the integrity of curent wikilinks to the film. If his heirs and assigns find a way to use existing footage as a posthumous tribute film, then the article can be ressurrected (sigh).  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:25, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per Bongomatic. Stifle (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: The article has now been re-written to show its unreleased state, noting its progression and history. It may still be suitable for historical consideration in either the John Ford or Harry Carey Jr. articles within wiki.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:14, 7 March 2009 (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.