Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The A-Team (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   Snowball keep, NAC. Umbralcorax (talk) 03:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

The A-Team (film)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article fails WP:N and WP:NF, violates WP:BALL, and to conclude it's existence on Wikipedia constitutes a de facto advertisement of a film that has not yet been released. allen四names 01:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. allen四names 01:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep - This is the flim version of a popular TV show, with notable actors (Liam Neeson among them), and a notable director. Film is currently in production. The nom appears to have a fundamental misunderstanidng of what a notable film is, per discussions on the article's talk page re: the film projects notability guidelines. - BilCat (talk) 01:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - The options are keep, delete, merge, redirect, and now incubate. By the way Warren Buffett could be financing this film, but it would not make it notable. -- allen四names 01:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But the references show that this is notable. You obviously don't understand notability. Joe Chill (talk) 01:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I found the closest thing to evidence of notability for this film here, but it is not enough. -- allen四names 02:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You just proved it even more. Joe Chill (talk) 02:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And with a 5-year old article at that. - BilCat (talk) 02:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And with years of significant coverage. Joe Chill (talk) 02:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * trout for both of you. -- allen四names 02:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not appreciated. I'm beginning to doubt good faith here, and sensing a disruption to make a point brewing with this so-called award being prepared. It's OK to have differing interpretations of guidleines, but accusations of "white-washing" aren't good-faith assumptions. - BilCat (talk) 02:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: Per The A-Team (film). It meets WP:NF and WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply. Joe Chill (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:NF, and as per indications, there is no case of WP:BALLS (it's real) or WP:CRYSTAL (it's set for a scheduled release with sources indicating as much).  -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 02:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Joe Chill. The article has legitimate sources to establish that this film is notable and is going to actually be released. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:02, 26 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.