Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MaXXXine

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 . Randykitty (talk) 16:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MaXXXine[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)

Does not appear to satisfy WP:NFF, which says "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. — Archer1234 (t·c) 00:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Film. &n--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)bsp;— Archer1234 (t·c) 00:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: article does not meet WP:NFF. Incubate in draft space and use AfC to ensure an adequate review is conducted prior to moving to main space. — Archer1234 (t·c) 00:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Either keep or draftify. If the first two movies were notable enough for articles then it is almost certain that this one will be too. This already has some coverage so maybe it is already eligible for an article. If not, it can be moved to a draft. The one thing we don't want to do is delete it and waste the effort that has already gone into it. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Should be draftified until we get better sourcing. Filming has barely started, that's about the extent of the coverage.

Oaktree b (talk) 01:34, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are now various notable sources stating that it has started filming. I have added some. Rather than deleting the article, let's add more sources. DisneyMetalhead (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Draftify~~ per WP:ATD-I. I wish that option had been exercised before coming here since it hadn't yet. Now my talk page has been tainted thanks to the over-zealous move of another editor... Oh well. I concur with the nom. the production is not notable at this point. It has been filming for two days, and the source of the only coverage is not independent since it really comes from the studio, nor significant (can be summed in two words: "filming started"). It is good as a verifiable source of info, but not to confer a notable production. -2pou (talk) 01:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Struck my !vote above. Several sources have been added, but they're pretty much just the same thing from different outlets. The latest addition at least expands on the PR license plate pic ever so slightly, but I don't know if an update to a "weak keep" is worthwhile. Either way, though, I have a do not delete stance since it can be sent back to draft for now, should consensus lean against keeping. -2pou (talk) 20:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there are now multiple reliable sources that have stated that principal photography has commenced. I have added a number of them to the article.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by DisneyMetalhead (talk • contribs) 02:19, April 13, 2023 (UTC)

The criteria for unreleased films that have already started principal photography is stated at WP:NFF, which says:

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.

— Archer1234 (t·c) 03:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify. May return to mainspace after it receives enough coverage and is released. Aintabli (talk) 06:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Keep - well sourced, notable. TheMovieGuy
Keep Filming has started, no point in transfering it to draft now since the sources pass GNG.★Trekker (talk) 12:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. 24.52.114.138 (talk) 13:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How does it satisfy WP:NFF? — Archer1234 (t·c) 13:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft per the rules stated above. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Filming has started and there are enough sources to pass WP:GNG. Little point in draftifying now. --wooden superman 10:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with several new sources added, including sources on the production. -WikiPete18 (talk) 19:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Please, the filming is still ongoing. CastJared (talk) 10:48, 21 April 2023 (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.