Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crazy Watto

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 all. If you would be so kind to your fellow closing administrators, please refrain from listing multiple articles for deletion within a single nomination, as it is exponentially difficult to derive consensus when this is done, and unlikely to produce the result desired by the nominator. Thank you, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC) 8-)

[edit] Crazy Watto

seems like fancruft JianLi 19:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm also listing

• Broken Allegiance
• Darth Vader's Psychic Hotline
• Fanboys (film)
• The Formula (2002)
• George Lucas in Love

JianLi 19:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep for George Lucas in Love. The rest is cruftastic and should be deleted. Artw 19:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep DVPH, The Formula, and GLiL, as these articles all assert sufficient (and verifiable) notability via winning notable awards and being mentioned in multiple reliable media sources. Delete Crazy Watto, Fanboys, and Broken Allegiance, as I can't find much importance for any of them. The BA article claims "the film garnered major media coverage and was screened at numerous local and international film festivals to great response," but a Google search of "Broken Allegiance"+"Star Wars" does not confirm any of this. -- Kicking222 20:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep Fanboys and The Formula, as they were AFDed less than a month ago with a nearly unanimous "keep" result. Normal keep DVPH and George Lucas in Love. Delete the rest. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 22:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment The Formula was also AFDed with a keep result about a month ago so I think that should be a Speedy Keep as well.67.68.155.127 03:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment Changed argument accordingly. I forgot about that one. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 10:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep All & Strong Keep for any that won an award. Their association with www.theforce.net is important & the notability of the Star Wars franchise confers greater notability on its major works of supposed "fancruft" than if they were associate with a less notable franchise. If these were mere fancruft, I doubt they would have survived on the associated template. Irongargoyle 22:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment All films have > 500 google hits. Irongargoyle 22:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep George Lucas in Love which received coverage in the mainstream media. Merge and redirect all the others to Star Wars fan films. --Metropolitan90 05:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete pages, merge relevant content to SWFF, redirect those deemed notable.  -- MrDolomite | Talk 03:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep on all. Fanboys and The Formula both recently easily survived AFDs, Broken Allegiance and George Lucas in Love have received major international and mainstream press, and Crazy Watto played at the Cannes Film Festival, and along with Darth Vader's Psychic Hotline is also notable for the people behind the scenes, including the creator of Men in Black and other famous genre personalities. MikeWazowski 03:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep on all. Especially Broken Allegiance and George Lucas in Love. Broken Allegiance won the Audience Favorite Award in the 2003 I-CON Film Festival, and was a finalist in the 2002 Australian Effects and Animation Awards. Fan Films Quarterly recognized Broken Allegiance as one of the 10 most pivotal moments in fan film history during FFQ's Summer 2006 issue (issue #4), released in June 2006. The film has over 12,000 google hits.George Lucas in Love has won several awards, including the Canal+ Short Film Award at the 2000 Deauville Film Festival, the Audience Award at both the Florida Film Festival and the San Sebastián Horror and Fantasy Film Festival, and was awarded Best Short Film at the 2000 U.S. Comedy Arts Festival. The film has 108,000 google hits. MKL 18:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep on "George Lucas in Love", which received coverage from the New York Times, and on "Crazy Watto", which played at the Cannes Film Festival. Speedy keep due to out-of-process nom for "Fanboys (film)" and "The Formula (2002)" — both were recently nominated by me and consensus to keep was decided. Weak keep on the remaining two. — Mike 20:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Do you mean on the remaining four? There are six articles nominated. Irongargoyle 21:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
    • No. Don't know why, but you inserted a bullet separating my vote into two votes, which I've changed back now. Strong keep on the first two, speedy keep on the two recently nominated, week keep on the remaining two. — Mike 23:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Sorry about that, just a random OCD moment where I totally wasn't paying attention to what I was being OCD about. Irongargoyle 00:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep on all. I don't know why independent films should be less important than ordinary commercial movies. Fancruft is for all these films here an absolutely inappropriated word. I could call many commercial movies commercialcruft too but I don't want to delete them. Projects should not be judged only because it's fan work otherwise someone could have the stupid idea and call even Wikipedia fancruft because it's not commercial and made also by amateurs. Deleting of articles about important fan films would be a great lack for Wikipedia and there is absolutely no need for it. The fan film scene is an important and growing scene and should not be excluded by Wikipedia. It should not only be made a decision for not deleting these articles but a general decision to keep articles about fan films with a certain popularity with perhaps at least 500 or 1000 Google entries because such article get requests for deleting from some ignorants with no good reason frequently. Someone who is not interested in this stuff should just ignore these sites but not request to delete them. I'm also not interested in every article of Wikipedia but I don't make a request for deleting. 217.184.70.211 23:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for all. FreakyMutantMan 06:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. -LtNOWIS 20:53, 26 July 2006 (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.