Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesus Is Coming

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. - Mailer Diablo 04:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jesus Is Coming

Jesus Is Coming (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

We're told that this movie (2002) is a "dark and dramatic comedy". Till recently we were also told that it was a controversial one, though this unsourced claim has recently evaporated. Two external links are given: the site of the movie itself (not a reliable source, of course), and imdb.com. Imdb.com too is hardly a reliable source for a minor movie, but all the same let's look at its entry. It's minimal. The movie gets no rating, as it still awaits five votes. Number of comments: zero. Number of external reviews: zero. This appears to be an English language movie, released in the US; the recency/anglophone/US biases of the web should work in its favor, and it's had five years to pick up buzz. It's a bit hard to google for the title without a huge number of false positives, but since the director and author are both Edward Donato, it seems reasonable to google for the combination of the strings "jesus is coming" and "edward donato". As of a few seconds ago, this brought just 35 hits. NN. (Indeed, its very existence is hardly verifiable.) -- Hoary 12:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete It is far below WP's standard for notability in films. BTW I thought the article was going to be about the expression "Jesus is coming." That would be notable enough for an article. Steve Dufour 12:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Comment: the image of the ostensible film poster, given its lack of spacing between the lines of text, looks more like something quickly cobbled together on a computer, and intended for use on computer screens. It is difficult to believe anyone would go to the trouble of actually printing this image in poster-sized format so it could be hung in a theater (or any other wall for that matter). Presumably, a notable film (most, anyway) would have gone to more trouble than this. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - falls flat on it's face on all five points of notability for films. Jauerback 13:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - per Jauerback and the unproductive Google News Archive search I did for Donato. --A. B. (talk) 19:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Highly exaggerated claims were made in the article for this film's notability - with no support. The only potentially notable element of this subject (and I'm really stretching for this) might be the ostensible appearance of Ron Perlman in the film... but I see that he appears as "Himself", and I wonder (assuming the film really exists at all) whether the camera was simply rolling when Mr. Perlman happened to walk by... Pinkville 12:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletions. —A. B. (talk) 19:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per very well-laid-out nomination. Dylan 21:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • If you go to the movie's website, there's a promo clip, that I must say is quite compelling, that the movie exist. It has a scene with Ron Perlman which is clearly not just a fluke. Also, Ron Perlman has it listed on his imdb and the he is listed on the Jesus Is Coming imdb. The movie was given an MPAA NC-17 rating, for strong sexuall content and violence. A movie called Jesus Is Coming with a NC-17 rating could be considered controversial. (Why would anyone not consider the imbd a good source?) Hollywood people source it all the time. Another thing, this is not the original movie poster. The original poster features a preacher standing on painters stilts, holding a bible and a bull horn. The movie is a mock-documentary, which could explain why Ron Perlman plays himself. There are a few other names besides Ron Perlman, listed in the movie's imdb, which one my consider well known. ThorLG November 4 2007
      1. there's a promo clip, that I must say is quite compelling, that the movie exist. Hardly. Where's the evidence that it was released?
      2. A movie called Jesus Is Coming with a NC-17 rating could be considered controversial. For a completed and released film, "controversial" either is a vapid marketing term, or it means that there was or is a controversy. Where's the evidence for a controversy?
      3. Why would anyone not consider the imbd a good source?) Hollywood people source it all the time. For a film that (perhaps unjustifiably) has won very little attention, why suppose that edits are checked and why consider it a good source? -- Hoary 12:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. I'm not doubting for a second that the movie exists, and indeed its entry on IMDB is decent evidence of that. However, every two-bit five-second movie ever made can get an entry on IMDB, therefore it does not provide evidence that the movie is any bit notable. Furthermore, the general standard on Wikipedia is for multiple, independent sources to establish verifiability and sadly, they just don't seem to exist. Stifle (talk) 18:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
  • The MPAA will not give a movie a rating unless, the picture has a theatrical screening, and slated for release. Even movies slated for DVD release, must be screened in a theatre, before it can be given an MPAA rating. imdb rules, movies 28 min. or less are considered shorts. Which has it's own category. Even the television category has the 28min rule. And, There is a very compelling trailer from Jesus Is Coming. The link is at the bottom of the Jesus Is Coming article, which takes you right to it. Hardly a 2 bit 5 second movie. The trailer itself is over 2 min. ThorLG November 4 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThorLG (talk • contribs) 05:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
    • So it had a theatrical release then. And, we must infer, did so at some time since 2002. Please provide links to reviews, or independent sources that verify its existence and notability. -- Hoary 07:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I found out that the movie's original site is jesusiscomingthefilm.com, a few things came up on google, but not much. However,I got an email from a source who said they were with Fineline, explaining about the movies release, and they were very upset about S.V. writing a wiki artical. It crossed up their plans... If you're interested I'll make a brief explaination as to what was said in the email. (Funny thing, in that same email there was a mention that Jesus Is Coming is being re-released.) What the heck do I know, I just like E.D.'s work. Perhaps an indirect wiff of promo... as thought...ThorLG November 5 2007


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.