Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apollo 18 (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 keep. -- Cirt (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apollo 18 (film)

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

Unsourced article about an upcoming film of no objectively provable significance. Guy (Help!) 22:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Once someone other than IMdB covers it then it can be included. Until then it isn't notable. Signed by Barts1a Suggestions/complements? Complaints? 23:39, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 00:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
INCUBATE for a couple weeks as this article is simply a little too soon. Ignoring IMDB, the film IS getting a lot of coverage elsewhere,[1][2] but is not quite yet worth being an exception to WP:NFF. As filming is about to commence, it's close... and I might excpect its return to mainspace before New Years Eve. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:57, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate, which I always forget about doing (thanks for the reminder!). - The Bushranger _{Return fire}^{Flank speed} 05:11, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate. There are verifiable, reliable sources that confirm this (I am actually rather excited about it now! :D) and they need some time to get into the article. Signed by Barts1a Suggestions/complements? Complaints? 08:33, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - despite there being very little information about it, this future film has already received a great deal of coverage: for example, [3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10]. Even if it hadn't, it might be considered notable for its association with Timur Bekmambetov and The Weinstein Company. As the film has a release date and is apparently definitely going to happen, and according to some sources may have already entered production, I think we should have an article on it; I don't see the point of deleting or incubating this one now only to recreate it in a few months when there's more to say. Robofish (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - with all that discussion by independent sources, which Robofish pointed out, I'm satisfied that it's notable. (I'd be happy with "incubate" too, but think it may be a bit pointless to incubate something on the understanding that already it's likely to pass some threshold for a return to mainspace by the end of the month) bobrayner (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2010 (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.