Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jurassic Park IV: The New Approach


 * 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   merge to Jurassic Park (franchise). NW ( Talk ) 20:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Jurassic Park IV: The New Approach

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod for a film that fails WP:NFF. This film is in "production hell" and it is unlikely to be made. The part about a new script is an obvious hoax. • Gene93k (talk) 13:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No references pointing to anything getting past Spielberg's brain. Not even close to principal photography having begun. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 14:00, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Can't find anything to say it will actually be made. Doesn't meet WP:NFF PanydThe muffin is not subtle 17:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Fails WP:NFF.  Gongshow  Talk 18:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFF. Barely an itch in the studio's pants. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per WP:CRYSTAL. Joe Chill (talk) 21:56, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It's also a little suspect to see the "16 year old screenwriter" thing. Can't find any info on this, either. Angryapathy (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect: to Jurassic Park (franchise) if title "The New Approach" and other details can be verified. "Franchise: Subtitle" is the kind of thing I enter in manually, so a redir is sensible. - BalthCat (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect Definitely. What is most important to Wikipedia and Notability guidelines is that there is considerable coverage about the fourth sequel. While yes, it seems to be in production hell and likely does not merit a seperate article, a merge and then redirect to a section at Jurassic Park (franchise) that would speak about the well-documented aspirations toward a fourth-in-the-series would be quite sensible. As even if the fourth film were never to be made, the subject of the 4th has itself received enough coverage in reliable sources to meet criteria and so merit inclusion and citation at the one place where it best serves the project. Addendum Reliable sources addressing the 4th sequel: Guardian, State News, MovieWeb, Cinema Blend, IGN, The Telegraph, Widescreen Vision, Horror Magazine, etc.  The subject has been covered in sources even as far back as 2001 . Continued coverage of the 4th merits inclusion in some manner, even if not as a seperate article.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 18:59, 15 November 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.