Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Predator 3

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 of the debate was delete. – Robert 01:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Predator 3

There are plenty of hits on Google, but poke through them, and you'll see it's all pure speculation. No listing on IMDb. No verifiable details of any kind. Delete until it's something other than a rumor. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-02 07:02:50Z

  • I just wrote that article, and yep, your right, get deleting! 210.86.40.187 07:06, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOT a crystal ball. Peyna 07:07, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - in spite of words like "probably", "supposedly" and "rumour" in the article, it does get 43,300 google hits, which is more than just wild speculation. Predator 3 already has its own movie page. So I think we can say that the whole crystal ball thing isn't relevant here. It is definitely going to be released. It is definitely notable. It is definitely going to be called Predator 3. It is definitely very notable. Since wikipedia is a collaborative project, we should have no problems changing the article's contents to suit changes in what is happening with the project. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 16:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:V; you can't possibly tell me that rumor sites are a reliable source of information, Zordrac.  RasputinAXP  talk contribs 16:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I'm telling you that I believe that 43,400 "people" have no reliable, verifiable information on the topic. Have you actually looked at any of the links? Just because it's in a Google search result doesn't mean it's worth anything. See WP:CITE and WP:V. If you can find anything beyond a bunch of fans wishing for a sequel, do share! :) —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-02 21:21:46Z
  • Delete: Cannot be verified. If we all wish hard enough, it still won't necessarily be. (See how long folks wished for the Firefly movie, and then see how it emerged with a different title than they expected and later than they thought. How about Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie and how long that was not only anticipated but "in production" before it was in production?) When it exists (at the very least, when principal photography has wrapped), it will be time to say what it is. Geogre 17:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
    • There's 43,300 verifications there for you. That's about the most ridiculous interpretation of "unverifiable" I can imagine. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 18:12, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Counting Google hits is not research. You must actually read what Google turns up. If you have found a reliable source of information about this purported movie as a result of a Google search, tell us what it is. Otherwise, you have failed to counter what RasputinAXP and HorsePunchKid (who both clearly have read what is turned up) wrote above. Uncle G 20:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - even though this topic is of ZERO interest to me personally, in the interests of fairness I rewrote the article somewhat, with reference not only to the Predator 3 movie, but also the 4 other commonly used ways to describe Predator 3. The reality is that Predator 3 already exists, as both a novel, comic and video game. There already exists a script. It is just a matter of when, and what precisely the movie will contain. I gave details of what the movie will be about, and confirmation as to what stage it is at, to ensure that we make fair votes here. Apparently the recent hype (as evidenced by the 44,000 google hits) is because Arnold Schwarzenegger has recently agreed to be a part of the movie, and a director has been found, hence pre-production is underway. This, combined with the success of Aliens vs Predator has meant that this movie is now going to be made. If you delete this, then its silly, because it will just be re-created later on. I suppose that immediatists don't see the value in this. Delete this, and you free up server space for oh 3 months, before its going to be back in force and then we'll have a whole big argument about whether or not it should be up now, or later, etc. Not to mention the fact that there are a range of products that have already been released. It's kind of like refusing to have an article on Star Wars 7 because it hasn't been produced yet. There's already a book and a script there. Star Wars 7 movie, fine, maybe there's an argument to prevent that. But Star Wars 7 full stop should exist. Its a similar kind of case here. These are not mere rumours here folks. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 23:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - I just noticed that the original author voted delete, so I guess then we have a no contest. I didn't realise that before. I still think its silly though. Does Star Wars 7 exist by the way? Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 23:53, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Apparently not. Unless its known by another name. Apparently, until they turn it in to a movie, we don't list it here, number 1 best seller or not. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 23:53, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Are you referring to Heir to the Empire??  RasputinAXP  talk contribs 01:34, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
        • Not sure. There's so many fan fic books and spin offs that its hard to tell the official from the fan fics. There were initially 9 books in the series, 3 trilogies. First 3 on Annakin Skywalker, next 3 on his son Luke Skywalker and next 3 on their kids. At least, that's what I read when I was a kid, before all the fan fic books. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 01:38, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
          • There is no Star Wars 7 yet, nor any scripts for it yet. But their are a number of official novels and comics that show what happens afterwards, and would supposedly be adapted for any new movies. One of the most commonly cited is Timothy Zahn's Heir to the Empire. -LtNOWIS 04:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
            • There is no Star Wars VII, and according to George Lucas, there never will be. Star Wars was originally planned to be a trilogy of trilogies, but he abandoned the idea after finishing the Indiana Jones trilogy (there is, however, a fourth Indiana Jones movie on the way). B.Wind 01:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
              • Yes I understand that. But weren't there books first? I can remember reading a comic book version of them (summarised, short and sweet - one comic book for each of the 9 episodes) as a kid. Or are you saying that they only wrote 6 books? Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 06:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
                • The first movie, called simply Star Wars, was issued in 1977. At the time, George Lucas said he planned to make a trilogy of trilogies, with Star Wars being the first film of the second trilogy. He intended to issue a new film in the series every three years, but waited 16 years after Return of the Jedi to make The Phantom Menace. All the books and ancillary products came later. Any books set in a time period after Return of the Jedi are the works of others, and not necessarily part of George Lucas' conception. -- Dalbury(Talk) 11:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
  • DELETE and REDIRECT to AvP. That is the third Predator film, and some have called it Predator 3 or Alien 0. It's also chronologically the third Predator film. As Ahnold is now the governator, and won't be making films for a while, this won't happen, because he's making True Lies 2 if he gets turfed, which is a much more solid bet than P3. 132.205.44.134 00:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete We're not in the rumor business. -- Dalbury(Talk) 01:21, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. When and if this movie happens, then someone can do a real page. Jtmichcock 02:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete for lack of verifiability. Friday (talk) 03:32, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as unverifiable and WP:NOT a crystal ball. Zordrac, if you feel that this reasoning is incorrect, you are more likely to get a productive discussion on the talk page to WP:NOT instead of grinding your gears against a bunch of people voting based on established policy here. ESkog | Talk 14:01, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • OK ,lets cut to the chase.I, yes I, creAted this article.I now realise that it is only wild speculation. I may have created this article, but now it must be deleted. it has gone far enough.{210.55.147.162 07:36, 6 December 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.