Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stan Helsing


 * 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   keep. General consensus here seems to hold that there's been enough coverage to demonstrate notability. ~ mazca  talk 22:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Stan Helsing

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable film Cynof  G  avuf 08:34, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete notability not asserted Josh Parris 09:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:NF. Five reviews from Rotten Tomatoes "top critics":, , , , . A non-archive search of GNews turns up a bit more coverage. --Chris Johnson (talk) 10:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This article has just come into being. Now it's at the stage of needing to be built up to meet the requirements.Fractyl (talk) 12:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. An AFD here is premature, though I agree that cleanup is in order. Multiple sources, including reviews, document that the film exists, is entering into a wide release, and appears to be notable. Doesn't look like a great movie, but it meets our criteria. UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 15:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete – fails WP:FILMNOT … it was just released last week, so maybe in a few weeks/months it will have sufficient notability, but righyt now, it feels like WP:CRYSTAL. &mdash; 138.88.125.101 (talk) 01:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * How can it feel like WP:CRYSTAL if the movie already is out? Fractyl (talk) 03:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment – The single-purpose account User: has twice removed the  template from the article … they have been warned, but Some Other Editor(s) might want to keep an eye out for their disruptive edits. &mdash; 138.88.125.101 (talk) 07:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * COMMENT – I suggest that a copy be made as a sandbox like User:Fractyl/Stan Helsing … that way, it can be enlarged as WP:RS increases over time, until such time as it does meet WP:GNG and WP:MOVIE … this can also be used to purge any WP:COI or WP:NPOV material … I say Userfy that puppy. :-) Happy Editing! &mdash;  10:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete or userfy - fails WP:FILMNOT; also fails WP:CRYSTAL by prematurely asserting non-existent notability of a new film. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I've added the Variety review as a ref for the production/distribution info (which BTW is not correct, this is in fact a Canada-US coproduction: imagine my pride!). Anyway, while Variety makes clear the lacklustre nature of this film, it does seem to have the WP:RS to merit retaining, when combined with the NY Post, Hollywood Reporter and Globe and Mail refs linked to above. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 08:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:02, 5 November 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.