Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crawler (The Descent)


 * 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 the changes and expansion of the article with new sources establishing notability and potential for an article. Davewild (talk) 19:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Crawler (The Descent)

 * – (View AfD)

Fails notability standards, has only one source, and couldn't possibly grow into anything worthwhile. DurinsBane87 (talk) 07:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Appears to be original research and fancruft. I don't believe there is enough material even for a redirect.  TN ‑ X - Man  13:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, notability not established. Huon (talk) 13:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete this is a pretty good example of what we mean by an unexpandable article: there just isn't much that can be said on this topic. Even the short substub that's there is pretty much entirely padding, with a direct quote from Movies Online and a bit of fan specilation that they may or may not use echolocation. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Any chance you can reconsider now that I've revised the article? — Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete for now, but the sequel, The Descent 2, will see a return of the crawlers. I've usually perceived repeat appearances as notable enough to have it sown article, but it would be speculative to say that the sequel will provide ample coverage of them.  However, there should be plenty of information about the crawlers in The Descent, which I plan to develop (having worked on Doomsday and trying to shape up Neil Marshall). — Erik  (talk • contrib) - 11:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fangoria does report this: For makeup and prosthetics creator Paul Hyett, returning to the hellish bowels of the Earth represented a great opportunity to broaden and refine his Crawler designs. “We had already gone through a major testing period on The Descent,” he explains. “So augmenting their personalities and looks and devising new, exciting killing methods were all I really had to worry about. I’ve played around more with their camouflaging skin tones, so they blend in better with their surroundings for stronger shocks. Jon wanted them more viciously feral, inbred, scarred and deformed, with rows of sharklike teeth for ripping flesh. Here, we go further into the creatures’ habitat and see their charnel house, bone-strewn domain and even a set we’ve affectionately dubbed the ‘Crawler Crapper.’" Don't know if that will change any minds. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep as I feel that there is sufficient information about the crawlers now; I think it's a fairly safe bet that there will be similar coverage for the sequel. — Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm changing my opinion to Weak Keep based on Erik's revisions and the knowledge there will be a sequel. I was unaware. DurinsBane87 (talk) 20:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Change to keep following the rewrite and the new sources. Huon (talk) 11:46, 30 June 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.