Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Premiere Production


 * 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 of the debate was as this is a debate, Last Malthusian "wins". :p Delete. Johnleemk | Talk 08:11, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Premiere Production
Not a strong delete, but don't believe it's as notable as claimed Oscarthecat 10:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC). Expanded / tidied it a little myself. --Oscarthecat 10:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * keep and expand if possible Jcuk 13:08, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete advert. Stifle 00:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

'This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!' Mo0 [ talk ] 06:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and cleanup. -- Run e Welsh | &tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; 19:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Was heading towards a 'weak keep' when they got a Google hit which described it as one of the 'big four' studios in the Philippines, but it went on to say that those four "...are all virtually closed down due to the proliferation of individual and collective modes of film production". That was the only Google hit I could find that related to this company that looked anything like a possible source for an encyclopaedia article. As it stands, we have no verified evidence of anything, let alone meeting WP:CORP. And of the five blue-linked actors, we have two articles created by this article's author (who might themselves be deletion candidates), two actors with no apparent relation to the studio, and a redirect to a Tintin character. I'd really like to know what the 'keep' voters see in this article that I don't. --Last Malthusian 19:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Further to that, it sort of seems from the few (very few) Google hits that this company existed and at least used to make films. But if kept, the article would have to be reduced to a tiny stub, since there's no verification that they a) made those movies b) worked in those genres c) were associated with those actors (those that appear to exist - both of them). And then the article would have to be watched to make sure that the unverified information wasn't put back in. Two last things worth mentioning: the official languages of the Philippines are English and Filipino, the latter of which uses the Roman alphabet, so the fact that Google finds very little isn't a language problem. And the Filipino Wikipedia doesn't have an article on this company. --Last Malthusian 20:15, 6 January 2006 (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.