Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/28 Months Later

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. Stifle (talk) 10:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

28 Months Later[edit]

Goes against WP:CRYSTALBALL, in an interview the director said their 'may' be a sequel[1], not that there is one (or that its even being produced). Only indication that the movie in pre-production is IMDB, which isn't a reliable source. If this movie becomes a reality and if it has significant coverage, then it should have an article, but it's too soon. -- Darth Mike (join the dark side) 05:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No references provided. Waterjuice (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: IMDB can't be trusted as a source. A quick search of Google News has a recent Danny Boyle interview saying they've got a good idea for 28 Months Later, not that its in production so it completely fails WP:CRYSTALBALL. For now the small section on a possible sequel on the 28 Weeks Later page is all that's needed. Alberon (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to main article. Speculatory. Slac speak up! 01:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:CRYSTAL. JamesBurns (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 28 Weeks Later#Sequel, where it is mentioned. Too soon for a separate article, as there is a lack of significant coverage (WP:N), and not enough confirmed information (WP:V, WP:CRYSTAL). —Snigbrook 14:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NFF and WP:CRYSTAL. This film is in "pre-production" according to IMDb. It is too early for an article until the film is actually shot. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice as this unsourced stub is way too premature, and there is already significantly more information about the sequel at 28 Weeks Later. No sense having a seperate article at this time. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:49, 31 January 2009 (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.