Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mulan (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 userfy. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 11:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mulan (upcoming film)

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

In September 2010, The Hollywood Reporter (THR) revealed plans for an international, high-budget movie based on the tale of Hua Mulan (previously popularized by Disney, see Mulan). The article confirmed a budget of millions, concrete plans for shootings and a deadline of January 2010. I sensed an opportunity and created Mulan (2011 film). After months of silence, THR again reported on the ambitious project, stating that it had fallen silent shortly before shootings began due to insufficient funds (see here, Ctrl+F "mulan"). Since then, it's been a year without any news, and I doubt that the film will ever happen. On December 31, 2011, User:Bovineboy2008 moved Mulan (2011 film) to Mulan (upcoming film).

I feel sad about this, not only because the movie could have been cool. The article was one of the few actual contributions I made to Wikipedia. Because of this, I felt unwilling to see the article deleted, so I moved it to User:Face/Mulan. After that, I left comments at Talk:Mulan (disambiguation), Talk:Zhang Ziyi, and Talk:Jan de Bont, as well as a hidden message at Mulan (disambiguation), so that users may find my text if they would ever create an article about the movie. User:Pengyanan undid my move, stating: "this article was edited by more than one editor and is not a private property."

Well, technically, he's right about that. I'm fine with whatever happens to the article. It is obvious to me that it can't stay in mainspace. If it should be deleted, so be it. theFace 15:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait and see. I found a news story released on May 9, 2011 (in Chinese), in which Zhang Ziyi said that the film Mulan was postponed because she had to finish another film The Grandmasters first. Since we cannot confirm that Mulan project is really canceled, we can at least wait for a while, say, several months, to see whether there is any new information. --Pengyanan (talk) 15:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He, thanks! I put it through Google Translate but, unsurprisingly, the translation is garbled. I've added to the article what I could make of it. Cheers, theFace 20:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 January 24. Snotbot t • c » 22:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support userfy. WP:NFF excludes articles for which principal filming has not yet begun, but in case it one day exists, it would be a shame to lose the efforts of editors who have worked on the article by deleting it. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support userfy per Roscelese. The proper time to bring an article about an upcoming film to the main space is when principal photography begins, as shown by coverage in reliable sources. Far too many promising film projects never come to fruition, but on the other hand, the work done on the article should be maintained so that it can be brought back if and when the film goes into production. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Userfication is fine for me. The articles edited by more than one editor cannot be userfied without a articles for deletion process (see Wikipedia:Userfication). If the consensus here is to userfy this article, I am OK with it. --Pengyanan (talk) 07:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, I don't think you're at fault; you were right to move it back, this process has to happen first. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:01, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or userfy per creating editor's wishes. Fails WP:NFF and the sourcing is almost entirely speculation. No prejudice towards recreation if and when principal photography begins. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 15:48, 25 January 2012 (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.