Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled Ben Affleck Nike 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 Draftify. Star  Mississippi  14:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Untitled Ben Affleck Nike film

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

Subject fails WP:NFF and WP:GNG. This should have been a draft. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 18:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 18:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Diasgree it fails guidelines. Project has received significant coverage and has begun production. Rusted AutoParts  18:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll ask if people don't agree, don't vote for deletion but rather for dratification, so the info doesn't get needlessly rubbished. Rusted AutoParts  18:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:NFF and WP:GNG. Principal photography has commenced, and the sources cited constitute significant coverage. Nardog (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Adding here that I'm unconvinced by the merge/draftify !votes below. I'm having a hard time fathoming what about, or according to what policy/guideline/consensus, being "routine" makes the coverage not significant. Nardog (talk) 13:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 23:11, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge into Sonny Vaccaro Until film is titled; this should be under the name of the subject of the film, not the actor (who's directing and not performing in the film, which adds double confusion to the title). That way RAP's concern is addressed, but the content isn't stuck under the dreaded "untitled bla-bla-blah" title at the same time.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:34, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Since when is there consensus that a film needs to have a title in order to have its own article? And he is performing in the film as well as directing it, though I'm at a complete loss as to how it'd be confusing if he wasn't—the director's name is often the most defining or identifying aspect of an upcoming film, and Affleck is pretty well established as a director (his film won Best Picture you know). Nardog (talk) 12:53, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm just trying to identify an WP:ATD or draftifying an article, and on the surface most loathe anything with 'untitled' in the article. I don't delve into WP:FILM that much but as a film consumer most gravitate to those actually starring in the film rather than directors because outside a few of them, we aren't titling things Craig Gillespie's Cruella. Also, please don't condescend folks; I know Ben's filmography, I just don't think the article should have his name in the title. Also per Bovineboy the coverage is indeed routine and we have time to develop this somewhere before it gets a title/starts production.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 18:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  This AfD discussion includes a proposal for merger to Sonny Vaccaro,,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and a notice of the proposed merger was posted to on June 27. As such, this AfD discussion may need to be extended or relisted to incorporate input from. Thanks, Kevin McE (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Draftify The coverage for this project has been very routine, just announcements of names, production details, etc. There is nothing notable about the production itself. The coverage is not significant as demanded by WP:GNG. BOVINEBOY 2008 17:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The fact of the matter is unless you're a Marvel or Star Wars film, the production details will always be "routine", this makes it difficult for basically any upcoming film to be able to be in mainspace. Regardless, the film's production has constantly shown up in the media, Daily Mail even writing up multiple articles about given days on set. Rusted AutoParts  21:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And? Perhaps Wikipedia should only have articles about released movies, not the routine stuff under some stage of production per WP:CRYSTAL. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 21:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A film doesn't have to be released to be notable, so I do not agree with this assertion. Rusted AutoParts  21:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Keep, Draftify or Merge? There is no consensus here that this page should be deleted but the desired outcome is under dispute. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify. Until the production commences and gains the necessary coverage to pass NFILM, this just isn't notable enough for an article. What we have now just isn't heavy enough to show that the production is noteworthy. If things fell through at this point in time, there wouldn't be enough coverage to justify an article. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  19:40, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I am very surprised to see this up for deletion, given the talent involved. Capt. Milokan (talk) 23:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll guess you'll have to make a note at WP:NFILM so everyone knows a movie's notability is based upon "the talent involved". Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 23:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Why are you being so snotty? The talent involved is why the film is being reported on as it films. Rusted AutoParts  17:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Draft until a title is attached. Lightburst (talk) 03:55, 10 July 2022 (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.