Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City Rats (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. Kubigula (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] City Rats (film)
Doesn't meet WP:MOVIE: "films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles, unless the production itself is notable per notability guidelines" -- and this one isn't. Accounting4Taste 23:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
--
Wikipedia has a section for films that are in production: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Upcoming_films and there is a strong case for including this film due to the numbers of well known British actors appearing in it as well as the musicians scoring the music. Many of these actors appear in the current trend of British Gangster films and as per the notability guidelines:
The film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career.
This will be the first leading role played by well known British actor Tamer Hassan as well as Ray Panthaki, both of whom have only played minor roles in a number of British films and this is indeed a film that should also be placed on their individual wikipedia pages.
This page is to be updated with further crew members (some of whom appear to be of note, as per the notability guidelines) once those listed on IMDB have been verified.
Jameslenton 00:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Comment It may help you to refer to the material at WP:Notable, which gives a definition of "notable" that may help you in this discussion ("General notability guideline"). Essentially, "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", so that's what would do the most good; adding sources to the article and noting those additions here would be helpful. Accounting4Taste 00:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I'm still getting used to the comments sections of Wikipedia. I had a look at WP:Notable before posting this page and felt that it was notable due to the following section:
WP:NotableThe film features significant involvement (ie. one of the most important roles in the making of the film) by a notable person and is a major part of his/her career.
I've tried to clarify this on the page itself, let me know if it's not quite right still please.
Jameslenton 00:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Comment; Generally, the "major part of his/her career" is taken to mean that the actor won major awards, critical acclaim, fame, for the role. Just being their first movie role doesn't guarantee it will be a major part of the actor's career. The film could get bad reviews and make no money. It would be better to try and find significant coverage in secondary sources about this film. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be any. Masaruemoto 02:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Don't see how this meets WP:MOVIE, and it's always a bad sign for an article to be telling you why it is notable. Stifle (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- This certainly isn't his first film role, and whether is makes money or not doesn't seem to be what Wikipedia is about? If the addition of the references isn't enough, then I agree it should be deleted until the film comes out. Let me know what you think.Jameslenton 23:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete The notability of this film is hard to determine until external reviews have appeared, ideally after it's been released. In addition the bulk of the article is a plot summary that fails WP:OR. Pedro : Chat 15:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Pedro's comments above. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 07:30, 27 October 2007 (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.
