Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ANZACS 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 of the debate was DELETE — Gwalla | Talk 20:17, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ANZACS Film

Speedied, but isn't a candidate. Reason was WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Speculation on a rumored project by Peter Jackson. — Gwalla | Talk 00:24, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Durin 00:59, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Jacob1207 01:08, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. No verifiable content. - SimonP 01:20, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Rumor of a rumor, plus substub that falls into criterion #1 of the speedy code, plus it's fairly incomprehensible (pre vis? previews?). Peter Jackson is doing Kong. If George Miller did an ANZACS film, I'd believe it, as his contemporaries Peter Weir and Bruce Beresford did one each. Geogre 01:39, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Pre-Vis is pre-vizualisation, part of the Weta Workshop/Weta Digital techniques for animated storyboards. Used extensively by Jackson in the Lord of the Rings movies. RickK 19:40, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, RickK. Man, though, it just reinforces my feeling that it wouldn't have been an outrageous speedy, since it's written at such a fanboi level that you have to already be a Jackson devotee to even understand what the article is saying. Geogre 23:49, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. (I want to appoligize, as I was the one who placed the CSD tag on it. The reason I gave doesn't qualify for a speedy.) func(talk) 03:27, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, at the moment trivial. Furthermore, it should really be ANZACs, with a little s. And for that matter 'ANZACs (Film)', to distinguish it from the decent 1980s television series. [1] Even better, 'Untitled Peter Jackson ANZACs project', because it might have a poetic name. It doesn't help Wikipedia's image that we have so many people drooling over the sketches of the director of the Lord of the Rings films; thank God Xena: Warrior Princess and The X-Files finished before Wikipedia took off.-Ashley Pomeroy 20:12, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unverified for now. --Etacar11 23:15, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I believe that the writer of the article has his/her facts wrong. What was seen in the King Kong production diary was almost certainly actual archival footage of ANZAC troops which was cleaned up by Weta Workshop to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the Gallipoli landings in April this year. See this article here for more information. AFAIK there is no planned movie on the ANZACs by Jackson - he is already in pre-production work on the next movie after King Kong, and it is nothing to do with World War I. In any case, the article has a lousy title and is just speculation, so delete Grutness...wha? 00:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Longhair | Talk 01:13, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete--Cyberjunkie 16:14, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete A rumour of a rumour of a movie that might be in production? A speedy, IMO. Rlquall 11:31, 11 Jun 2005 (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.