Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Other Side (unreleased 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  14:47, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

The Other Side (unreleased film)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article about a never-released film, not adequately sourced as the subject of sufficient coverage to be exempted from the primary notability criteria for films at WP:NFILM. This was first created in 2009 while the film was still in the production pipeline, on the basis of a small blip of coverage when Lindsay Lohan was cast in it -- but she was subsequently dropped from it, and while Olivia Thirlby was cast to replace her, the film still collapsed and never actually came out in that form either. As always, however, it isn't Wikipedia's goal to maintain an article about every film that enters the production pipeline without regard to whether it was ever actually finished or not -- the principal notability bar that most films have to clear is that they were actually released and reviewed by professional film critics, while never-released films have to demonstrate that their failure would somehow pass the ten-year test as a topic of enduring significance in its own right. But this, with just five footnotes about the casting and uncasting of one actress, doesn't clear that bar, especially since even those five footnotes are mostly to unreliable sources like Hitfix and Digital Spy, rather than real GNG-worthy media. Additionally, this was redirected to Lohan several years ago on the grounds that as the only aspect of the film that has any sourcing for it whatsoever she's the closest thing it has to a notability claim, but was restored to a standalone article earlier today on the grounds that she wasn't the only notable person involved in it -- but "had notable actors in its cast" is not a notability criterion for films per se (films with notable actors in them are likely to clear other criteria anyway, but it's no sort of guarantee), so the names in the cast list aren't by themselves reasons why an unreleased film would get a special exemption from the film notability standards. A couple of casting announcements simply aren't enough of a reason why a film that was never released, and never seen by the public or reviewed by film critics, would be permanently notable at all. Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't look like much has happened since the Lohan mention, and that's not enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete This is why we no longer create film articles based solely on casting announcements, rather on the film being actively in production or in the process of distribution; a leftover article of that era.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 16:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Note: I was the editor who restored the article. ( I think my article restoration edit may need some clarification based on your nomination statement. I restored the article since the title redirecting to Lindsay Lohan created an issue somewhat akin to an ambiguous redirect since it is not clear "why" Lindsay Lohan was selected as the redirection target when the content of the article contained additional notable biographical topics attached to the project. For example ... why not redirect this title to Woody Harrelson, Anjelica Huston, or Jason Lee (actor) instead? My restoration of this article should not claim that I believe the subject of this article is notable, but rather the redirect was inaccurate and since ... disambiguation at this title to disambiguate subjects attached to an unnotable subject is something we do not do.) Steel1943  (talk) 17:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, I wasn't accusing you of anything unreasonable or improper — I was just explaining the history in the process of building a case for why this title shouldn't exist as either as a redirect or an article anymore. Bearcat (talk) 18:21, 6 November 2023 (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.