Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vamps (film)

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 incubate to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Vamps (film) and redirect to Amy Heckerling until more sourcing becomes available. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vamps(movie)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Film that hasn't been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography (per WP:NFF) and per WP:CRYSTAL). Taken to AfD after IP contested the WP:PROD Jarkeld (talk) 23:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article has been cleaned significantly to meet Wiki standards by user: MichaelQSchmidt also listed on the filmography of a number of noteworthy actors:Sigourney Weaver, Alicia Silverstone and Krysten Ritter, it gives wikipedia readers a chance to learn more about these projects when they check out these profiles.Pumkinhead001 (talk)

Delete or incubate without prejudice toward recreation. The project has been getting coverage since 2009 [1][2] and is now "officially" in pre-production. If and/or when this one begins filming, let's bring it on back. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Amy Heckerling, the director. Restore it when there are sources indicating it's in production. dissolve ^talk 20:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Amy Heckerling. First, I recommend revising the article to be in good condition, then to redirect it to the director's article, where we can also write a paragraph about the film. If the late April start does take place, we can remove the paragraph and undo the redirect. Erik (talk) 18:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
comment I think the article is in good condition and also there are other noteworthy people involved with the movies besides Amy Heckerling. RegardsPumkinhead001 (talk) 18:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pumkinhead001, the reason the article is nominated for deletion is that it is not a certainty that this film will be made. Since the project is mainly Amy Heckerling's, I recommend merging to err on the side of caution. If the film does not start production for some reason, readers can get brief coverage of the project at the director's article. If filming does begin, then we can have a full article till the end of time. Erik (talk) 18:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have modified above to "incubate", because (and as I have now added such to the article) it IS getting press that pushes at WP:CRYSTAL... and so if incubated, editors can work on it as the asserted "late April" production nears. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is enough notable news sources on the movie already that it is able to override WP:CRYSTAL, as it says there "All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." We know this movie will have an article when it is released and the amount of pre-coverage should be enough that it can be incubated until then. Silver seren^C 00:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not yet enough substance, maybe in a few months or a year when it comes closer to release. Str8cash (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why you are opposed to incubation? Silver seren^C 21:27, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not opposed to that idea, i just feel at this time there isn't enough reliable information on this film to keep the article. I'd lean towards a Merge or Redirect also if that seems more helpful at the end of the day. Str8cash (talk) 00:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is there not enough reliable information with the sources in the article? Silver seren^C 06:06, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.