Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarzan (2016 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. Obviously, if the film actually goes ahead, there will need to be an article. At the moment, though, policy-based consensus says there doesn't. Black Kite (talk) 01:15, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Tarzan (2016 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:NFF, film has not entered main production and has not received exceptional coverage thus it is too soon for a stand-alone article BOVINEBOY 2008 00:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:NFILM as independent reliable sources do not confirm that principle photography has begun. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 03:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep or Redirect - Filming is to begin soon sources say, so keep it, I'll make it more better. Otherwise redirect it to David Yates or Tarzan until the filming commenced, the redirect edit will be "undone" when production starts. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 03:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete: Multiple sources all in the film business is to be expected, since it hasn't fully started yet. With filming about to start, it'll just spring right back up anyway, so we'll keep the facts. What's there now is fine, just keep an eye on it so it doesn't end up violating WP:CRYSTAL. Completely forgot about WP:TOOSOON, it's definitely that. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 07:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails CRYSTAL and NFILM, as SummerPHD said. Furthermore, films of this scale aren't always guaranteed, with 2012's Paradise Lost a prime example. Rusted AutoParts 04:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NFF as filming has not yet begun. It is WP:TOOSOON.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  05:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep If the article will be re-created in a few months, I really don't see the need to delete it now.  Gloss •  talk  06:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Reply The article will be re-created in a few months, at the right time, if and only if filming commences on schedule, . Are you aware of how many highly touted film projects have collapsed over the years, because of problems with financing collapsing, stars bolting, crappy screenplays and so on? This article should be deleted now and recreated later if filming starts. Ask an administrator to userfy it for you in the interim.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  07:04, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with User talk:Cullen328, because there is not yet a guarantee that this film will be created, we should delete the page in order to avoid misleading anyone who reads it thinking that its production is official. There is still over two years until the film is set to be release, so there is plenty of time to recreate the page when more information is provided. Adamh4 (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and protect the page. It can be restored if the film moves forward. Betty Logan (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep and redirect it to character's page, wait for some time, studio has announced the release date for 2016, which they never announced before. So at that point it looks like the film is going to happen now, as the last three casts were added in late 2013 and early 2014, which is also a sign of it's happening. So I would suggest to keep it until studio reschedule the date or collapsed the project. It's highly anticipated project, we should keep it as a redirect to Tarzan in film and other non-print media, where it will lead the readers. If studio collapsed the project, I'll myself nominate it for deletion. That's all. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 10:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Reply: Assassin, you can't vote twice. Rusted AutoParts 14:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Move to draftspace per WP:DRAFTS. I think the notability guidelines for future films applies well here. This film had issues in development back in April 2013 as seen here. It looks like the most recent news is Skarsgard being officially confirmed as Tarzan, in just the past few days. This does not necessarily mean that the film is a done deal; Skarsgard could easily bow out, as other actors have done. To use WP:DRAFTS, one would basically move the article to Draft:Tarzan (2016 film). Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 13:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Reply, your's a better idea otherwise redirect to Tarzan in film and other non-print media. -- Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 16:58, 16 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Move to draftspace per Erik. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Tarzan in film and other non-print media per WP:NFF. --Rob Sinden (talk) 10:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * would you support a move of the page contents to the Draft space, but make the Mainspace page the redirect, until the draft is ready? (Since the Draft space has been created, it is perfect for film articles not yet ready for the mainspace to be worked on, hence my questioning.) - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * , I like the Draft idea, except doesn't it have to be constantly edited to make sure that it doesn't get deleted? If there was a way we could guarantee that, then we wouldn't have to worry about WP:TOOSOON OR WP:CRYSTAL. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 00:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't believe that is a requirement Supernerd. It would be similar to a user creating the page in their sandbox. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with moving it to draft, it just doesn't belong in mainspace. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Just trying to save usable content for when it is ready. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 11:51, 24 February 2014 (UTC)




 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Merging is also worth considering. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2014 (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.