Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Window Horses


 * 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   redirect to Ann Marie Fleming. Move to draft space SpinningSpark 13:37, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Window Horses

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NFF - film hasn't been filmed yet. Don't believe it meets GNG Gbawden (talk) 09:09, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose It doesn't matter if it has been filmed or not if it meets WP:GNG. In addition to the CBC ref already on the article, I see it's been subject of significant coverage already in Hollywood Reporter, Canadian trade Playback and on CBC Radio. Three WP:RS (or four, if the two CBC are distinct enough) meets my rule of thumb for "multiple" coverage. The article's a little premature but it seems to pass GNG and should be kept. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, the two CBC references were actually the announcement post and the audio stream of the same interview with Sandra Oh — so no, they weren't really two distinct sources. Bearcat (talk) 05:44, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Ann Marie Fleming. While their is enough coverage to justify some coverage in the context of its notable creator, WP:NFF suggests redirecting rather than having a separate article under these circumstances because of the possibility that production of a film may be delayed or canceled.  Eluchil404 (talk) 05:33, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * In this case, it's animation so "filming" isn't quite the right term, necessarily, but it does sound as if the principal animation work has yet to be funded/started. I'd have no objection to a merge. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 05:43, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect for now. Right now work hasn't really officially started and until that point it's still somewhat up in the air whether or not it will get made. I think that it will ultimately depend on whether or not the IndieGoGo campaign is successful or not, although I know that stuff can fall through even mid-production. In any case, right now it's just too soon for an entry. I'll try to clean it up so that when/if more coverage becomes available, we have a good copy to go back to. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:37, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Just as a point of comparison, we don't create an article about a television series until it's actually been officially upfronted by a television network, regardless of how much advance sourcing you can provide about the existence and production of its pilot. We don't create an article about a new album until we have a title, exact release date and complete track listing confirmed in reliable sources, regardless of how much advance sourcing you can provide about the fact that the artist in question is working on an album. We don't create an article about a book until its publisher officially announces it as part of its upcoming releases list, regardless of how much sourcing you can provide while the book is being written. And that's the way we need to be with films as well. Things can change along the way which can result in the work getting abandoned or orphaned by its creator, or not actually picked up by a publishing/distribution channel — so as a general rule, we need to wait until we know for a fact that it's actually, definitively going to be released to the general public (else we'd have to keep an article about every spec pilot that ever got made and then turned down by a network, every film that ever entered the development pipeline but never actually made it out the other end, every album that ever got started and then kiboshed without ever actually seeing the light of day, and on and so forth.) I'd have absolutely no objection to sandboxing this in draft or userspace for the time being, and it absolutely warrants a mention in Fleming's and Oh's articles (Fleming's being in dire need of some actual referencing!), but it's not something we should have a standalone article about while it's still in the process of getting funded and made. Userfy for now; move back into articlespace once we actually know a definite release date for it. Bearcat (talk) 05:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect for now to Ann Marie Fleming where it can be spoken of and sourced as one of her upcoming projects. Fails WP:NFF and simply TOO SOON for a separate article.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 23:40, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Move to draft space and replace with a redirect to Ann Marie Fleming per the rationales offered above. Deor (talk) 10:19, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect article but with possiblities... it good topic when is more sources found... 41.190.36.250 (talk) 10:07, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Move to draft space & Redirect to Ann Marie Fleming - WP:NFF KylieTastic (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Move to draft space and redirect for now per above. Metamagician3000 (talk) 10:19, 18 November 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.