Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/After We Fell

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=After We Fell}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=After We Fell}})

After We Fell

This is either an unreleased film, or a film without Reception information. It does not satisfy film notability guidelines. A draft was submitted and declined three times in July. In September, a draft was submitted at about the same time as an article was created, so that the article cannot be moved back into draft space.

There is a schedule of release information in various countries, some prior to 6 September. However, it also states that release will be on 30 September. There are no reviews and no reception information for the film's release in other countries.

An analysis of the references shows nothing significant:

There is nothing that constitutes independent significant coverage.

Some random editor will probably state that the film has completed production, and that films that have completed production are considered notable. This is a common but silly misreading of a badly written portion of the film notability guidelines. It reasonably divides films into three classes:

• 1. Those that have not begun production, which are not notable.
• 2. Those that have begun or completed production, but have not been released.
• 3. Those that have been released.

The guideline then goes on to say:

• Additionally, 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.

This film has not been released. There is nothing in the advance coverage to the effect that the production is notable. The version that is in article space should be deleted, and the version that is in draft space can be left in draft space until it is ready for article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Assuredly. It's been released and it's going to more countries this weekend, including Canada. Clearly a notable film. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
• :{{reply|All Hallow's Wraith}} That rationale has no grounding in Wikipedia policy. The advance coverage does not suggest it's a notable film. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete and draftify as WP:TOOSOON. Wait and see how much coverage this gets. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
• Keep A film does not need to have been released yet for it to have enough notability to be an article. But Box Office Mojo has box office numbers for the film so its obviously already been released. There also seems to be enough citations to satisfy notability.JOJ ^Hutton 23:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
• :{{reply|Jojhutton}} Quantity of sources is irrelevant. Five of them are shown above to be irrelevant. The additional two that have appeared are brief mentions. My view is unchanged; this should still be draftified or deleted. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

• Keep The movie has received significant coverage and satisfy WP:NFILM -GorgonaJS (talk) 08:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
• :{{ping|GorgonaJS}} Would you mind supporting your assertions with sources to show this subject passes WP:GNG? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 11:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
• ::It's odd that so far all the 'keep' comments have had no basis in policy or evidence. That's why these discussions should never be considered a vote. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - Fails WP:NFILM --John B123 (talk) 13:05, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.