Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Z The Movie

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. Walton^One 18:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Z The Movie

• Note to closing admin - if you read the page history, you will note that one user has taken to multiple !votings, and then removing anyone who tries to put an {{unsigned}} tag on his !votes. The Evil Spartan 14:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Z The Movie (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This appears to be a non-notable movie. There aren't any third party reliable sources currently used to prove notablity, etc. I will admit it's difficult to do a search to find any of those mentions given the title of the movie, but I did to the best of my ability, and found nothing: [1]. There is a conflict of interest in the creation of the article - though I'm not sure that's a valid for deletion, it doesn't help prove the movie's notability. The Evil Spartan 23:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Keep I believe it meets the criteria for notability - but that better references should be added. 69.116.62.33 03:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOTFILM "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"; if it approaches release and more sources are available go ahead and re-create the article. Eleland 14:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep (struck triple vote, The Evil Spartan 14:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)) Seems to be of acceptable 'notable standard', i think due to it's indie status. With release coming very soon and teasers already released (They are linked to from the external link Meme and Zeke), it makes sense the page should remain. It has external links, citing the production website, a 'bebo' page and teaser links. As teasers have been publicly released, it has external links and it is notable i think it definately should not be released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehatgang (talk • contribs) 19:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. All who've added to the article have been single purpose accounts, likely WP:COI. Precious Roy 19:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. The producers are currently sending out a press release to the papers and regional news programmes. The Wikipeida entry is included as non-biased third-party information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehatgang (talk • contribs)

• Please only give your bold faced opinions once, and please sign your comments. 64.178.96.168 20:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• Stop it. If you'd like to remove one of your votes, feel free. But you only get one, and you need to sign your comments. The Evil Spartan 14:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep I suggest the external links are followed before questioning the entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehatgang (talk • contribs)
• Delete per the nominator, the single purpose voters have shown me the light! Burntsauce 20:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - a yet-to-be-released movie by a yet-to-be-a-director director just isn't notable and should go. But the threshold for inclusion is low and I fear the article will simply be recreated when the movie is released. -- Steve Hart 21:33, 27 August 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.