Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ice Age 3

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 21:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ice Age 3

Completing AfD. Nominated by anon IP 81.104.165.184 (talk • contribs) who couldn't complete nom. No reason for AfD given, but I suspect it's based on crystal-ballery with no hard information at all about the planned movie. Fan1967 17:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Good guess, though you'd have saved yourself some trouble by looking at the talk page :-) 81.104.165.184 18:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

But there is hard info: "It will be released in 2009. It will be made by Blue Sky Studios." I think it needs a cleanup, but not deletion. 81.170.50.197 18:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

How do you know it definitely will be released in 2009? Or maybe 2010? Or that it will even be released at all? These are reasons we have the policy that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 81.104.165.184 18:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but you can certainly say "scheduled to be released in". Otherwise why is there a special template for future film releases? 81.170.50.197 18:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You could say that, but you'd need some pretty solid and up-to-date references. I imagine the original intention of the template was for films 3-4 months, rather than years away. 81.104.165.184 19:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete crystal ball, no IMDb page. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 18:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -Whomp 18:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, because if it's in development and there's a speculative release date I think it's worth having a stub saying so. 81.170.50.197 18:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

  The operative word being speculative. 81.104.165.184 19:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Per previous votes on Ghostbusters 3, Mrs Doubtfire 2, Scooby Doo 3, etc., endlessly, ad nauseam. How about we wait till they actually make the movie? Fan1967 19:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per crystal ball policy. Crum375 19:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. no refs given. IMDB has nothing. At the very least wait until the prodution is actually announced before creating Wikipedia articles. - Motor (talk) 19:19, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. no refs given. --Tone 19:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Could mention that it is scheduled to be released in the Ice Age (film) article. BuckRose 19:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Comment If you can come up with verifiable sources for production plans and schedule. Fan1967 19:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Let's find some sources on this film and put in on here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.167.216.74 (talk • contribs).
  • The fatal flaw in your plan is that the relevant sources won't exist for another 3 years. 81.104.165.184 20:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: Nothing but Speculation Deathawk 23:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per crystal ball. When I see commercials for it on TV, I won't object to the articles recreation.--El aprendelenguas 18:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per crystal ball and this article being nothing but a placeholder until anything exists. Peyna 22:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete without prejudice until verifiable sources can be provided. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: Only refrence I could find was from [1] Fox has not locked in the talent for a third Ice Age film but doubts that will be a problem, said Chris Meledandri, president of 20th Century Fox Animation Not enough for its own article but maybe a mention in Ice Age (film)#Sequels. Eluchil404 07:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Now that we've got the article here we may as well. It would be a waste to delete it, as it will save us making a new page when the movie comes closer to release. 211.29.137.28 11:18, 9 June 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.