Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two (upcoming 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 Draftify. You can find this article at Draft:Two (upcoming film). Missvain (talk) 02:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two (upcoming film)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NFF, nothing found to pass GNG. Per NFF, "... films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines." Kolma8 (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Kolma8 (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Kolma8 (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Draftify: Couldn't find any sources either, and the two in the article aren't enough to establish notability. It could always be created again if there's significant coverage in the future, but for right now I'm not seeing any of that, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We can't know if it will have coverage in the future and shouldn't just keep it because it might. HoneycrispApples (talk) 05:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought of draftifying at first, but after some consideration, it seems like a good alternative to deletion. There's no set number on how many sources there should be to establish notablity, but if this gets a couple more good sources like the ones already in the article, I think it's reasonable to say it could pass WP:GNG. Until then, giving this article a chance to grow in draftspace seems reasonable. HoneycrispApples (talk) 00:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify The work put in thus far can still be WP:PRESERVED for the time being until more coverage is released. The two sources in the article are actually good sources. I guess it might depend on your interpretration of what makes a notable production. If it's jut multiple sources at any point, then that is met, but if it has to be widely covered at all stages, it's borderline. I'd lean keep, but draft space seems a reasonable alternative per WP:ATD-I. -2pou (talk) 19:35, 17 May 2021 (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.