Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In the high attention area 2


 * 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   userfy to User:SerdechnyG/In the High Attention Area 2. As the film's release date is given as "approximately in 2012", I urge the author to read WP:NF carefully before attempting to return this to the main space. JohnCD (talk) 22:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

In the high attention area 2

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No assertion of notability substantiated by reliable third-party sources. (Cited sources are for trivia and passing references; NYTimes references doesn't at all mention this film.) Might be appropriate at ru.wiki, but not here. --EEMIV (talk) 12:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * If you had read this article at all, you may know that NYTimes references describing the events on which scenario is based. However, I don't think you read it. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 13:34, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 *  Delete Userfy Per below. I have removed the NYT reference, which had nothing to do with the movie. There are wikilinks available to guide readers to the events on which the scenario is based. The NYT reference does not lend any hint of notability to this movie, as already stated by the nom. The only GHits I found are to blogs or sites offering the DVD for sale, neither of which are reliable sources. --Crusio (talk) 13:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please, read above, before writing the same. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 14:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 *  Delete Userify If the creator is willing to work on the article, I have no objection to moving it to his space so it can be worked on. (GregJackP (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC))
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Unnotable film that has no demonstrable significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. Fails WP:N and WP:NF. Also noticed NYT "source" which does not mention the movie, which means it is not a source for this article nor gives the film any notability. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 23:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually it wasn't broadcasted yet. It's being filmed now. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That does not negate my delete at all. It is still clearly unnotable as it has no significant coverage and, it also fails WP:NFF in addition to what I've already mentioned. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 06:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It doesn`t fails WP:NFF, it has a principal photography, one picture from filming is presented in the article. Other information is a commercial secret of filming company and could not be revealed. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Listen people, you are talking now about film, which is unreleased and not finished yet. It's a final part of trilogy, and it is of big interest for Soviet- and Russia-related movies critics and ordinary audience. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * To User:SerdechnyG... It being unfinished and unreleased is the difficulty, as in those cases Wikipedia guidelines about speculation toward its completion and a film's actual notability require a great many more sources dealing specifically with the film and its production than might be required for a released film... and even then, an unfinished film might not make it.  I offer that you might have the article userfied and re-submit it mainspace when sources, even Russian sources, can be included that shows it meets guideline.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * All right. Clear. Besides, there is no intent from me, to reveal the director's idea, so I'm asking now to replace this article in my space for further edit. -- SerdechnyG (talk) 06:32, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Userfy to User:SerdechnyG/workspace/In the High Attention Area 2 for continued work per discussions above.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * To User:SerdechnyG... all you need do is drop a note to an admin after this discussion is closed, requesting it be userfied to you. The admin could then move the article and its history to your workspace.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 16:41, 18 March 2010 (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.