Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/The Mummy 3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] AfD tag
Hi, I can't work out how to fix the tag. If anyone else can I would be very grateful. Mallanox 01:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nomination was correct
Apparently I'm a bit late to vote, but:
- Delete Even if it could be absolutely guaranteed that a film is in production, that doesn't mean we need an article on it. All films in development and production are subjects of rumors, unauthorized leaks, intentional misinformation... films that go into production don't necessarily get completed, no matter who is behind them... the staffing of a film is never certain... the film, even if completed, may not be notable. Entertainment magazines, "insider" reports, IMDB articles on films in progress, etc. are just a massive rumor mill, entirely unreliable. What can reasonably be stated on such an encyclopedia page? What would have happened if we had a Wikipedia page on the Kevin Smith Superman starring Nicholas Cage? What false information would we have spread during the production of Eyes Wide Shut, had there been an article prior to the completion and release of the film? Somehow, many people seem to favor keeping this, but to me it seems akin to writing an article titled "The O.J. Simpson Guilty Verdict" during the opening arguments of his trial. zadignose 11:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Did you actually look at the reasons why it was kept? There were clear citations in the article that indicated that production began and concluded, and IGN definitely qualifies as a reliable source. Furthermore, Adrian Paul's official diary chronicles his filming experience, and there were the first three minutes available on the official website, however ugly it is. —Erik
- And to my distaste, there is a Canceled Superman films article under which the Kevin Smith Superman is mentioned. Feel free to hack it apart. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Did you actually look at the reasons why it was kept? There were clear citations in the article that indicated that production began and concluded, and IGN definitely qualifies as a reliable source. Furthermore, Adrian Paul's official diary chronicles his filming experience, and there were the first three minutes available on the official website, however ugly it is. —Erik
(talk • contrib) - 15:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC) This will have to be revisited in another discussion/nomination.
- I DID look at the reasons why it was kept, Erik, and it doesn't say anything close to what you say here. There is no suggestion anywhere in the article or the AfD discussion that the production "concluded," or even that it had begun. In fact, the article states that only this month Rob Coen had been approached to direct the film. IMDB only shows it as "Announced," and states: "Since this project is categorized as being in production, the data is subject to change; some data could be removed completely." There's also no mention of IGN, and I'm not sure what that is. The Variety article says that the lead stars had not been signed to participate yet. And some sources, such as IMDB or even Variety can be much more reliable when discussing completed projects than describing projects in development or production. In fact, people generally don't criticize Variety and other industry/entertainment magazines for inaccurate forecasts regarding films in development, because the assumption is generally that these articles are highly speculative and subject to change. As for the Cancelled Superman films, I'll gladly look into it.zadignose 17:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
