Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mall Day (Movie)


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 00:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Mall Day (Movie)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Disputed prod - non-notable film project. Casting and location scouting are thus far incomplete and the project has yet to commence principal photography.

PerWP:NFF "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles … Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable". pablo hablo. 22:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable per nom. and WP:NFF. JohnCD (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Three short sections of which none are referenced. Would support stubbing if it was more notable. &rarr; Dyl @  n  620  23:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - Think about it a lot of low-budget productions have wikipedia pages. There is nothing wrong with a film being on there and a Imdb page is coming but it takes 2 weeks to get on imdb. And MTI Video will sell it and Casting is coming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.77.96 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC) — 69.242.77.96 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - sorry, but you should read WP:NF, WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOHARM. An IMDb entry is not enough, because you can post it yourself - Wikipedia needs reliable, independent sources. JohnCD (talk) 09:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: per the article filming will not start until March 2009, thus it fails WP:NFF. Baileypalblue (talk) 07:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —PC78 (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 *  Keep  If we have a RS that says that filming will begin next month (which will make it meet inclusion requirements) we should keep it for now as we aren't a bureaucracy and process for process's sake can be disruptive. No objection to a renom if it isn't filming my March.  Hobit (talk) 20:56, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - but we don't have a reliable source that says filming will start next month; in fact we don't have any source at all, except the authors, to indicate that there is anything here but two lads with a camera and an idea that they would like to do a film. JohnCD (talk) 09:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, missed that. Abstaining until (and if) I get a chance to dig deeper. Hobit (talk) 14:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - This Movie is a low-budget direct to DVD movie if it will sell then i support it being on the site. P.S. This movie will probaly get it's earn as a "Major Motion Picture" but that doesn't mean anything lots of low-budget productions get the "Major Motion Picture" title to drag in costumers. I support keeping this movie up on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.77.96 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 21 February 2009
 * You can comment as much as you like, but you only get to say "Keep" or "Delete" once. JohnCD (talk) 09:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete there's no sources writing about this film that would indicate notabilty -- Whpq (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: insufficient independent 3rd party sources. JamesBurns (talk) 03:00, 24 February 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.