Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Island (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   delete. No sources presented or claimed that the article meets WP:GNG, there was a consensus presuming non-notability under WP:NFF. No policy-based argument for notability was presented. joe deckertalk to me 06:48, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Island (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Non-notable film. Ridernyc (talk) 00:45, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Procedural Keep - This is the third nomination in four minutes by the same editor, indicating some sort of automation is being used. No indication that WP:BEFORE has been followed in any of these nominations, nor is an adequate rationale for deletion presented. Nominators should not expect others to put in time to defend or sustain a nomination that they are themselves unwilling to spend in investigation and stating of a viable case for deletion. Carrite (talk) 01:00, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Before was followed. I have actually been checking all these articles today and suspect major conflict of interest and puppetry going with these pages.  The movie and none of the actors in them appear to pass notability and many of the articles seem to be created by users with similar editing styles and patterns, some of whom have been blocked from editing. If have a real reason why the article should be kept you are welcome to comment.   Ridernyc (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Whether this topic follows or fails general notability guidelines may be irrelevant, as the reliable sources verify the existence of producing or releasing the upcoming film. Notabilities of some actors are, as well, irrelevant to the existence and notability of this film. No other articles directly related to this article exist, and merging this article into either existing biography or Post-apocalyptic would be a big mistake. Whether the conflict of interest is committed is irrelevant to this film itself. In the meantime, the fate of this film must be anticipated, and reviews must be anticipated. Moreover, Untitled Tom Cruise Project still exists, notable or not, and does not violate WP:Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --George Ho (talk) 06:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * How is the GNG irrelevant? Ridernyc (talk) 13:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If the topic fails GNG, what about other considerations, such as notability requires verifiable evidence and is not temporary? --George Ho (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Still not seeing how any of that gets it around the GNG. Ridernyc (talk) 13:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you rephrase? I don't get it. --George Ho (talk) 13:44, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 13:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NFF for completed-but-as-yet-unreleased films and the lack of better coverage simply making this article WP:TOOSOON and not qualifying as a possible exception to guideline. Within a few months I may well be arguing for keep. I agree though, that the nominator's WP:JNN nomination statement was not quite per instructions at WP:AFD, and left the nomination itself open to question.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:51, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NFF for completed-but-as-yet-unreleased films. Happyxmas (talk) 03:28, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NFF establishes that "films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable". I find no RS for the production itself being notable. --Tgeairn (talk) 20:11, 6 June 2012 (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.