Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Lampoon's Pledge This!

National Lampoon's Pledge This!
 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Redwolf24 07:08, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

National Lampoon -- remember that? Back when your parents were your age -- er, no, a bit further back than that -- it was an amusing magazine. Then the name was applied to a succession of movies that usually got terse descriptions such as "bomb" or "dud".

So what's this about then? A film that hasn't been issued, starring Paris Hilton. But Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; wait till this is released. -- Hoary 04:56, July 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * PS Gosh, this really turns out to exist and to be coming soon. I must have misread "2005" as "2006", or perhaps I even more sleepily misread my position in the space/time continuum as 2004 rather than 2005 (I had a hard night last night): either way, I got the impression that the celluloid muse was promised to grace us with this opus over a year from now. I take it all back. The IMdB synopsis makes the film sound terribly thrilling, and I bow to Capitalistroadster's judgement when he says (below) that it "has a notable star in Paris Hilton" (my underlining for emphasis). So keep! Millions of readers of WP want to know! -- Hoary 09:24, July 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, it has an entry at imdb -- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0417056/combined, and there have been a couple of news items about it (although really more about its cast) -- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0417056/news. See also http://movies.hsx.com/servlet/SecurityDetail?symbol=PLEDG, http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=10221, and http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/526/526381p1.html.  John Barleycorn 05:18, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Hamster Sandwich 05:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This film already gets over 4500 Google Hits has been filmed and in post-production for release later this year and has a notable star in Paris Hilton. Trailers are already in cinemas and online. Verifiable and notable. If we delete it now, it will simply be recreated in a few months time. Capitalistroadster 05:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep We don't delete an article on a movie because you don't think it's funny. --malathion talk 06:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this and your crystal bawls. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 07:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or stop the movie from being produced -- either will do. gren 07:35, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per John Barleycorn. …Markaci 2005-07-26 T 07:44:19 Z
 * Strong Delete Per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Additionally (this is not grounds for deletion), there is no information here besides the IMDB details. Halidecyphon 11:23, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per John Barleycorn -newkai | talk | contribs 12:53, July 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete nothing noteworthy in the article and unlikely to be until the movie is (ever) released. Garglebutt 13:37, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is precedent for articles on unreleased (but confirmed) films, and this one seems to be pretty much a done deal. 23skidoo 14:15, 26 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, concur with Hoary's change of mind james gibbon  15:01, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not much encyclopedic about it now, but it's scheduled for a November release; it'll just be an unnecessary duplication of effort to re-create it then. Fernando Rizo T/C 17:06, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Please try to maintain your enthusiasm, i'm sure this will be the best movie ever, but no reason to squat on a page, just wait till its out.--Kilr0y 22:42, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The anonymous creator and "keep" voters are "squatting on a page" in one sense for the next several months. Some of the "delete" voters are "squatting on a page" in another sense in their voting.  I wish there were more than the iMDb (however that's capitalized) to go from, but that and precedent are just enough to make me vote keep.  Nothing noteworthy is likely to exist after the film is released, unless the kid asking about nudity in the IMDB forum gets his wank-wish.  "Nicky Hilton" is listed as being cast as "Unknown".  That shouldn't change.  Barno 00:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete speculation - wikipedia is not a crystal ball. JamesBurns 08:58, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep rather than recreate the thing four months later. Ashmodai 10:48, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - misuse of crystal ball argument must end. Proto t c 11:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. --*drew 07:32, 29 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.