Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lycans (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. Jaranda wat's sup 02:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Lycans (film)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The future film article fails WP:NOTE because there has been no significant, non-trivial coverage by independent, secondary sources. A Google search shows only 30 hits, mostly Wikipedia and copies of the present article. Additionally, the film's only presence at IMDb is in a user-submitted comment at the bottom of the purported director Joey Paul Gowdy's bio here, which does not meet attribution standards. The article, without any coverage that there is production on such a project, is also in violation of WP:CRYSTAL. The article was prodded for deletion, but was removed without explanation. Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletions.   —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletions.   —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - very much WP:CRYSTALly at this point - come back when it's in production and getting some coverage. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Aw, cool, a werewolf film! The furry fandom are gonna love it!  Unfortunately, there's nothing correlating to any development, other than a brief image on an "official" site and a myspace page. Gotta pull out WP:CRYSTAL here again and cast a delete !vote. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 00:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, it looks like they have The Wolf Man (2008 film) coming out soon! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * ...ooh! =^_^= Still, I like the poster art, but that's not a good reason to keep an article such as this. That one's kinda scrawny though.... -- Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 01:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Although I can't decide if this is a crystal ball issue (since the movie's not out yet), or a POV issue (as the only references are promotional material for the production), either way it qualifies as a deletion candidate. spazure 09:03, 12 July 2007 (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.