Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Scooby Doo: The Beginning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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The result was Nomination Withdrawn (non-admin closure). Ecoleetage (talk) 01:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Scooby Doo: The Beginning

Template:La (delete) – (View log)

Future film, no reliable sources found. Prod placed by Shnitzel Treelo removed by IP without reason. No hits at all outside IMDb. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 21:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC) Withdrawn I searched the exact title and turned up only two hits, one of which was Wikipedia. Thanks to those who have turned up a few more good sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 01:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NFF: "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles." JohnCD (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete For the same reasons I mentioned in my nom, fails WP:V, WP:N (and WP:NFF by extension) and amounts to little more than glassball peeking treelo radda 21:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. WP:NFF sums it up pretty well. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 21:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NFF. Bart133 (t) (c) 21:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Tentative keep. Sources are out there, and if this article is to believed, filming is due to commence this Tuesday (August 5), so deletion per WP:NFF might be a touch hasty. Incidentally, this AfD was started two days ago for what now seems to a duplicate article. PC78 (talk) 21:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Not really; it appears to be a reliable source, and can verify most of what's in the article, which should alleviate some of your concerns raised in the nom. It's not the only source, either [1], [2]. PC78 (talk) 22:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • That is definately not a trivial mention. Schuym1 (talk) 22:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Missing the point, these references you pull up are predominantly for casting calls, only one explains when principal photography will start which is really the contentious point here, not just how many references you can dig up proving it exists. Won't be against a merge into Scooby Doo should it just not be notable enough but I'll be watching this for the remainder. treelo radda 23:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • If the start of principal photography is the main point of contention, then I think you're missing the point. It's scheduled to begin in just four days (the duration of this AfD, incidentally); why be in such a hurry to delete if a valid article could be created just days later? PC78 (talk) 02:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:CRYSTALMY♥INchile 02:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Wait. If filming is to begin in 54 days, then there is no need to rush to delete. This is is one of those cases where a film is moving away from Wikipedia:Crystal and Wikipedia:NFF to become something easily established under Wikipedia:N, Wikipedia:V, and Wikipedia:RS. No one need be in a rush here. So let's simply wait and watch the transition. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 04:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I think the above comment actually makes the case for deleting now. Rushing to delete this article isn't the issue - it was the rush to write it that's the problem. If this film is ever shot, I'm sure Wikipedia will still be around for the article that can be written about it. TruthGal (talk) 06:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Rush to write? The article has been evolving since its inception on July 20. Wikipedia will still be around in 4 days as the article continues to be improved. The nom spoke to lack of sources, stating that "No hits at all outside IMDb", That issue has been addressed. There is no need to delete prematurely. Or would it serve if I move the whole thing to a sandbox for 4 days and bring it back when filming comences and the entire reason for this AfD is rendered moot? Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 07:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
KEEP I agree with Schmidt. There is no reason to beleive the film won't be shot. There are multiple sources indicating it will. They've even done casting for it. thus we have no reason to NOT beleive the film will be made. Until that changes I feel we should keep the article.--Marhawkman (talk) 07:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I could make a very, very long list of movies that went through the casting process only to never be shot. (John Belushi in Confederacy of Dunces... John Candy in Confederacy of Dunces... Chris Farley in Confederacy of Dunces... Will Ferrell in Confederacy of Dunces...) TruthGal (talk) 16:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
That's actually a very sad history [3][4][5]... and trebly so because of the number of times the death of a lead caused cancellation or postponement... but with respect, this AfD is not about that film, nor about a list of films that were never made. In 3 days filming either begins or it does not. There is no hurry here, really. Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 18:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
And you have just given me an excellent idea for an article about films that should have been made but never were... what a wealth of resource must be out there! A whole world of speculation or sadness or intrigue... and article that will never stop growing. Do you have that "very, very long list" written down anywhere? Michael Q. Schmidt (talk) 19:03, 1 August 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.
Retrieved from "http://debianws.lexgopc.com/wiki143/index.php?title=Wiki143:Articles_for_deletion/Scooby_Doo:_The_Beginning&oldid=7110666"