Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Kings of Appletown


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:31, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

The Kings of Appletown
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There is no information that it will be released. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oscar22 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment - Was listed incorrectly, fixed now. &mdash; neuro(talk) 15:15, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep it is in post-production. G-hits and cast seem to satisfy WP:NFF.  Gtstricky Talk or C 22:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete There is no information.Oscar 22 11:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.171.141 (talk)
 * (Assuming that is actually Oscar) Your nomination demonstrates your POV, so you don't need to post a vote. flaminglawyerc 00:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:03, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Keep It's in production. Jmbranum (talk) 06:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It's in production. There'll be more info on it after it comes out. But for now, it's already on the IMDB and others. flaminglawyerc 00:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as in production, per WP:NFF. – Alex43223T 03:58, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete . After vacilating back and forth. This is very marginal.  It has not been released and has generated very little coverage, but I finally found some media coverage of the production which might qualifiy it under WP:NFF.   But looking again everything seems to be trivial and/or non-independent.  If/when its released an article will be needed, but until then it may be premature.  Eluchil404 (talk) 04:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Striking my vote.  Schmidt,  has found some better sources but they are still awfully thin.  Despite meeting the NFF guideline in terms of the production cycle, topics like this still need independent, reliable sources.  And in this case, given that it is s current, commercial U.S. project, I don't think that we should assume they exist but are hard to find; just about everything will be listed on Google and I can't find much.  But it's not nothing either, so consider me neutral on the article's fate. It'll be brought back upon release anyway, so any deletion is likely to be a strikly temporary affair.  Eluchil404 (talk) 03:30, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Crystal does not apply as filming has begun and it seems to be getting enough coverage in reliable sources to satisfy notability for future films. Article should be nurtured, not deleted.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Update: Have done a bit of cleanup and sourcing. Though back in post production, and to be released in 2009, the film had a sneak-peek preview (limited) release on December 12, 2008 per The-Numbers.com.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Reasonably sourced for a future film. -- Banj e b oi   14:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per sourcing found. I disagree with the WP:CRYSTAL argument for deletion since there is verifiable coverage about this film. — Erik  (talk • contrib) 16:59, 28 December 2008 (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.