Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ThunderCats (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 except signature updates.
The result was delete. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 17:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ThunderCats (film)
The notability guidelines for future films stipulate that a stand-alone article for a film should not be created until a project enters production. This is for very good, practical reasons. Many factors such as budget issues, scripting issues, and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. We've seen so many projects fall by the wayside at the last minute that it's the only way of ensuring that this place doesn't get clogged with stubby articles about films which were never made and thus would ultimately fail the general notability guideline. It should also never be assumed that because a film is likely to be reasonably high-profile that it will be immune to the usual pitfalls which can affect these productions, especially in the current climate. Look at how many productions were postponed, even shelved indefinitely, because of the 2007-2008 Writers Guild of America strike, including the very high profile Justice League film, Pinkville, Johnny Depp's Shantaram among many others. It's not just those affected by the strike; Jurassic Park IV, which many would consider a no-brainer for a speedy greenlight, was actually supposed to be released in 2005, and we don't even have a separate article for the (now delayed by another year) Hobbit film yet. In accordance with the guideline, the article can be recreated without prejudice when production is finally confirmed to have begun. Steve T • C 14:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.
- Delete per nom (it must get really tiring to keep on nominating articles having to explain future film guidelines over and over, huh?). Could possibly be userfied if somebody is willing as it does contain useful, sourced info. The Dominator (talk) 14:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator; I couldn't have said it better myself. No problem with recreating the article if production does begin. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Argument on article deletion Do as you wish, but just for your information, the sole reason I created this article is because the main ThunderCats article, which is in severe need of cleanup, had a notification suggesting that a new article be created for the upcoming film. Was that a poor call on behalf of a Wikipedia administrator?
In addition, Wikipedia has a Category for 2010 films, which means that it includes articles on films currently in production and projected for a 2010 release just like ThunderCats. There may not be a great deal of information on this film yet, but the information we do have is well founded. If this is going to be deleted to do Writers Guild strike postponements, I'm sure there are plenty of other film articles read to be deleted as well. Cale (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- The future films department of WikiProject Films have been doing just this -- see the clean-up. We have different approaches depending on the content. In the majority of the cases, mention of a project in development is placed at the original source, may it be a franchise or a director. Without the clean-up, you would definitely be seeing more "scheduled" films in the 2010 films category. The important difference to note is that because a project is in development does not ensure that it will actually be produced. This is very common in the film industry, no matter the significance of the source material -- see Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film) and Logan's Run (2010 film) as a couple examples of perpetual developments. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:52, 2 March 2008 (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.
