Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark Ascension (film)


 * 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 no consensus. Keep !voters correctly point out that filming to start is not required for the film to be notable but there is no consensus whether it actually is at this point.  So Why  18:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Dark Ascension (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable future film. Contrary to claimed in the last afd principal photography had not commenced then and still has not now. Last update at imdb said "Securing filming locations". Film lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Just a few reproductions of routine casting announcements, reproduction of PR is not independent. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  04:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - The movie seems to have a number of notable cast members and a decent-sized budget. There are many Wikipedia articles on movies of this size. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 06:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFF. Last bit of development news was in 2015. No indication at this point that filming will actually start. It can be recreated if filming does start and if there is sufficient coverage from reliable sources about it. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 17:47, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - They posted some update announcements back in February on Facebook. There's not much info but it sounds like it's still in progress. --Posted by Pikamander2   (Talk)  at 01:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems like they spent time on another film. I do not find it to satisfy WP:NFF, though, since there is no indication that filming has started and since no secondary source has reported on this news. If they really do make the film and get covered by secondary sources, then an article can be had for the ages. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 13:01, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it unwise to ignore instructions of WP:GNG. Even if never made into a film, a topic's notability is determined through coverage, not existence. Under WP:ATD through coverage we can always temporarily redirect a "worrisome" topic to writer/director or major actors whose involvement gets press related to the project.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 18:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yashovardhan (talk) 09:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric  07:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing to indicate this movie is actually being made, last news was years ago. Page can be re-created if the movie happens Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:46, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, a "word" was given just last February, not "years ago". And even if never made as a film, a topic's notability is determined through coverage, not existence. How about a redirect or a draftify?  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 18:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)




 * Keep per meeting notability criteria for unreleased films and through WP:GNG meeting WP:NF. And while we do not require coverage to be eternal, it appears in may release this coming December.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 05:59, 11 June 2017 (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.