Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fun Size

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 keep. Nomination withdrawn, and while other "delete" !votes remain, the early concerns regarding lack of coverage/sources have since been addressed. (non-admin closure) Gongshow ^Talk 17:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fun Size

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

No references, violates WP:CRYSTAL, and barely any context. Tarheel95 (Sprechen) 04:11, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer: Nominator withdrew his nomination on February 12,[1] due to article improvements of February 10.[2] Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep.~~ The movie's IMDB listing notes that the film is in post-production, which is well within acceptability per WP:NFF. In addition, a simple Google search for "Fun Size" yielded numerous sources which can substantiate information in the article. Remember that a lack of content is not grounds for deletion. elektrik SHOOS (talk) 04:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changing my vote to delete. The admittedly only cursory look for sources I discovered focus more on the director and Paramount's "betting" on his films than "Fun Size" itself. Given that this movie only receives a passing mention in all of the sources I found, it at present fails the "significant coverage" and/or "presumed" sections of the WP:GNG. elektrik SHOOS (talk) 04:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per WP:CRYSTAL and the lack of sources. Films get articles if/when they become notable, not before. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 04:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Come back when the film has been released. JIP | Talk 06:40, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Vote withdrawn because of withdrawal of nomination. JIP | Talk 18:49, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, but for anyone to say there are no sources is unfortunate, as there are plenty available. Further, and in regards sourcing and cries of crystal being violated... the film has entered principle filming, this is being reported, and per policy and it is appropriate to discuss the project per that extensive coverage. The brand new article was sent to AFD just 40 minutes after the last edit by its newcomer author,[3] and it took only a few minutes to begin expansion and sourcing of the stub to make it a decent little start class article.[4] As this film's production has been receiving coverage ever since its director was announced in January 2011, and continues to receive coverage now that it is being filmed in Cleveland, we have the topic meeting WP:GNG. Far better to build the article on a notable topic than it is to delete it. Had this been written last year, I would likely have opined otherwise. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

deltionist keep cast and in post production, so passes WP:NFF and has significant coverage. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Always happy when a died-in-the-wool deletionist acknowledges that concerns have been addressed. Thanks.Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna withdraw the nom on this one, plenty of sources to pass WP:NFF at this point. Tarheel95 (Sprechen) 02:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Appreciations for the withdrawal. It was fun to improve this one.... and I expect we'll have even more coverage. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The movie has been shot last year and has been given a release date. Barring the end of the world, it's definitely coming out. Peace. — Hasdi Bravo • 15:47, 14 February 2012 (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.