Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haunted State: Theatre Of Shadows

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Haunted State: Theatre Of Shadows[edit]

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

Unreleased film of no visible notability; all Google search results are either directly generated by filmmakers or are databases. Nat Gertler (talk) 00:10, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:52, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:48, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No stand-alone notability. per WP:NF BOVINEBOY2008 13:19, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Haunted State. Until more sources are available, the film article should be redirected to the film series article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, I'm dubious about the continued existence of the series article, of the previous film article, and of the director's article. I possibly should have bundled them, but in the moment I was focused on this low-hanging fruit. --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If keep, move to Haunted State: Theatre of Shadows (Wikipedia rule about prepositions) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:47, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have an article to cite but it's in print form only. The film is being made and there will be more press on it. Is there a method of linking news that is print only? Adjinwis —Preceding undated comment added 17:48, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can use that as a reference, the footnote should contain the name of the author, article, publication, and page number. Having said that, expect editors to be somewhat wary in accepting this as establishing notability, if they cannot easily verify it, as your edits suggest the possibility that you have an interest in promoting this filmmaker and his work. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:58, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

Delete this as yet unreleased film that fails the criteria for such. Allow a return only after notability is established. Okay if author wishes it userfied.Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 09:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:58, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:NFILM, also per Nat Gertler. --Bejnar (talk) 18:43, 16 June 2017 (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.