Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Cage (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 REDIRECT. Planewalker Dave (talk) 16:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Luke Cage (film)

Luke Cage (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Almost a year ago it was proposed that this article should be merged and deleted and yet nothing happened. On July 8th I proposed this article be deleted using the proposed deletion tag as it is clearly breaking the WP:FUTFILMS policy. We have no evidence that this film is still in development, let alone "confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography". On the 12th an anonymous IP address user removed the deletion proposal tag and provided no reason.

Almost all important and reliable information in this article is at the end of the Luke Cage article, so no merging really take place. I really think this article should be deleted so in the interests of fairness and obeying the Wikipedia deletion policy I'm proposing it for deletion in this manner. Planewalker Dave (talk) 10:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Delete since it has not begun filming and is not guaranteed to. I've added more information to the "Film" section of Luke Cage, though... there are similar extensive sections at Wonder Woman (film), Spider-Man 4, Justice League (film), etc. No problem with recreation if filming ever begins on this. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 11:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Change to redirect; more favorable to preserve the page history. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Good point, I'd forgotten about that option. A redirect would be better than deletion. Planewalker Dave (talk) 16:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Maybe you could withdraw the AFD, and we could go ahead and redirect? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• That's seems reasonable. As a lot of people are posting their opinions, I'll leave this be until, say, tomorrow lunchtime and assuming the majority opinion is still a redirect (which I imagine it will be) I'll go ahead and do that and withdraw the AFD. That sound alright? Planewalker Dave (talk) 17:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 11:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• Keep or Redirect (formerly just Keep) - It seems that the amount of time the movie has spent in development hell is giving it more notability than some movies that have been released. Whether the movie is ever released may be irrelevant. - House of Scandal (talk) 14:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• You may want to review the notability guidelines for future films; the stance is that without actually being filmed, there is no plot section, no cast section, no production section, and no reception section. Thus, it does not and is not guaranteed to qualify as a full-fledged film article. Such projects are notable because of some previously notable element, whether it be the source material or the director at the helm. This is based on a Marvel character, so per WP:FUTFILM#Process, it can find a comfortable home in a "Film" section at the main article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• I'm familiar with the guidelines you mention but don't feel they disqualify this article, especially given the press coverage the tie-up has received. However, I have changed my initial "Keep" opinion to "Keep or Redirect" as my concern is for keeping the compiled information available on Wikipedia. - House of Scandal (talk) 17:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• Redirect. Erik has already merged the content of this article into Luke Cage, and that seems perfectly acceptable to me. Consequently this article should be turned into a redirect in order to preserve the page history. PC78 (talk) 15:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. With the content moved, and given there's little to zero chance of anyone continuing to search for this would-be film, just delete it and be done. ThuranX (talk) 17:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• Redirect per the good arguments above. Keeping the redlink might encourage its recreation, and the history is kept for the day when (if) this goes into production. Steve ^{T • C} 19:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

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.