Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lincoln (2012 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   merge to Steven Spielberg. with no prejudice towards recreation at a later date. Courcelles 08:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Lincoln (2012 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Film is in pre-production, WP:NFF. BOVINEBOY 2008 18:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Delete, as it is not notable at this point. Old Al (Talk) 22:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:NFF.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Steven Spielberg where this film is already mentioned and in some detail. Yes, the planned film currently fails WP:NFF, but as it involves a highly notable director, and IS getting coverage, WP:FUTURE indicates we can write of it in Wikipedia if properly sourced... thus the section in the Speilberg article.  A redirect saves the history for that time in the Fall of 2011 when the film is slated to actually begin principal filming.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep It has a high-profile director, several well-known actors, and has received enough coverage to already have thirteen references. A few films due to be released further in to the future currently have their own article. The IMDb page is fleshed out enough to show that there currently exists more than just an announcement of the film's upcoming release. - • The Giant Puffin •  12:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with your points, but IMDB is not considered reliable for films in pre-production... even films with anticipated notables attached. And while yes, we do have a few rare exceptions to WP:NFF, they are for planned films with far more persistant coverage and over a longer period of time, where coverage of the events of production have a decidely strong notability granted through AFD discussions and consensus of editors... and on a case by case basis. I ask you review WP:Planned Films so you might better see how those exceptions might be determined. This particular planned film does have the coverage to merit inclusion in Wikipedia, WP:FUTURE and WP:NFF guide that at this stage it has a happier home for the next couplwe months in the director's article. It is getting closer to fall, and the very moment principle filming is confirmed, the redirect can be reverted and the article then fleshed out further.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect per MichaelQSchmidt. Even though it is a high-profile director and has notable actors, even these movies can be unsuccessful during preproduction and dropped after sometime.  The productions notes are interesting, but these can be just as easily described on Spielberg's page. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 18:38, 25 July 2011 (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) 00:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect as per Schmidt. Nymf hideliho! 07:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to Steven Spielberg, there is content that can be moved from the article to the section. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:NFF is helpful for keeping small budget and minor films from popping up all over the place. A Speilberg film at this point in its development, with an array of available sources, is just not the intended target of NFF. Merging it dumps too much info on this specific film into his biography.--Nkgal (talk) 18:18, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I do agree that a merge would dump too much extraneous informtaion in the the Speilberg bio. But as the film is already spoken of there per WP:FUTURE, a redirect per WP:NFF is the better option that presevres the history until such time as the planned film receives enough persistant and in-depth coverage that the the events surrounding its production merit it then being an exception to NFF, at which time the redirect can be undone and the article fleshed out with the (assumed) new sources.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:36, 2 August 2011 (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.