Login
Login

:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Factor X (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 delete. PhilKnight (talk) 17:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

=[[Factor X (Film)]]=

{{ns:0|M}}

:{{la|Factor X (Film)}} ([{{fullurl:Factor X (Film)|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Factor X (Film)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

This is far too early, there's just not enough info on this yet. Ged UK (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. Pleanty of reliable sources - [http://www.totalfilm.com/movie_news/eric_bana_and_terrence_howard_have_factor_x][http://www.movieweb.com/news/35/15335.php][http://www.cinematical.com/2008/06/03/eric-bana-in-talks-for-judd-apatow-adam-sandler-dramedy/]. Not a violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Dalejenkins | 19:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —PC78 (talk) 21:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Explicity fails WP:NFF. PC78 (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per the notability guidelines for future films since it is not in production. This project was first announced in October 2006 and has not made serious leeway since. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • keep (sorry, ignore this and see below, can someone tell me the markup for scoring through text?) it has reliable sources which suggest sufficient notability, such as its mention by the hollywood reporter. i've added some more info from the sources and referenced it better. Jessi1989 (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I just put the answer on your talk page. Schmidt (talk) 01:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • delete just read wp:nff and the sources do not show that "principal photography" has begun. not sure why this rule applies as the film does appear to be sourced an notable, but according to that policy i must vote delete. sorry for the mix-up. Jessi1989 (talk) 23:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. This is a textbook case of speculation. WP:NFF explicitly says that films that have not commenced principal photography should not have their own articles. And IMDB is not a reliable source. Cliff smith talk 23:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. May pass CRYSTAL but fails NFF. The article is way premature. Perhaps move the 5 sentences to article on Gregory Allen Howard or New Line Cinema? Schmidt (talk) 01:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non notable. Schmidt (talk) 05:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

:*Psst... you !voted twice. :) Don't get your AFDs mixed up, now. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

::Oops. Was not intentional. Struck second vote. Schmidt (talk) 22:51, 8 August 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.