Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Prometheus (film) - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

589:. If the film actually gets made, significant coverage will probably appear and yes, at that point we'll want an article on it. But that's no reason for keeping it around in the hope that it actually gets made. The point of deletion is to remove an article that is guaranteed to be full of rumor and speculation as, by its nature, it is about an item that does not yet exist and may never come to exist. Deletion now is not an impediment to a new article being created in the future if, in fact, the film comes to fruition, especially given that the project is 801:. Appears to have sufficient prominent coverage to satisfy the GNG and justify an exception to the SNG. Since the project is no longer categorized as a prequel to Alien, the section there should be truncated, with relevant material merged into this article. Obviously standard deletin is inappropriate; the choices should be limited to keep andmerge/redirect. 329:
where this topic is already far better covered and better sourced. As we do not treat "film projects" as films until principle filming actually begins, we might allow a return only if/when filming begins OR when coverage increases to the point where the topic of the project might merit an independent
527:
that the topic may receive significant coverage in reliable secondary sources, but as this is a future film that has not yet even begun filming (and appears to still be in the embryonic stages), comprehensive coverage does not yet exist. Thus far the source coverage that has popped up is mostly of
697:
had a well-written and well-sourced article well before its release, having been in production & thoroughly reported on for 13 years...but again, the coverage already existed), this weeds out most articles about future films/albums/games that have not yet begun principal development and about
686:
You don't need to be familiar at all with IMDb. You literally just go to imdb.com and type "prometheus" in the search box, just like you would at Google or any other searchable website (including Knowledge (XXG)). Anyhoo...I think we just have fundamental differences of opinion here regarding
425:: The article is in its embryonic stage and will expand as the film goes into production and more details are released. I never understand the willingness to delete pages which are obviously of interest to the public in general, especially with a franchise such as that of 542:
I really can't understand the problem with this article - when the film does enter production, it almost certainly will receive significant coverage, so if we delete it now, it will very likely be recreated again eventually. What, then, is the point of deletion?
429:. As long as there are references to any news releases and the quality maintained, their is no reasoning for getting rid of the article. If the there is a redirect, any fears of quality will just be much of an issue on that page, so that point has no merit. 671:
guideline; it seems to me always better to keep an article on projects like this if there's a reasonable chance they will be significantly covered in future. I don't expect my saying that to alter the outcome of this AfD, but I will say it for the record.
453:
rare cases that an unmade film is allowed to have its own seperate article. As you do wish to improve this one as more comes forward, why not simply request of the closer that the current one be userfied to you in a workspace at
160: 687:
articles on future topics. You think we should keep such articles on the possibility of their future coverage, while I take the opposite tack: I believe that our standards require us to judge article topics based on
621:
I think that's a very weak reason. It's a stub: The thing is 9 sentences, an IMDb link, and a navbox. Since most of it is speculative, future-tense material, it'd wind up totally rewritten anyway. --
443:
With the greatest of respect, and though I do agree that as the film approaches production coveage will quite likley increase, the topic of the prequel IS currently far better covered over at
209:. Although the film is in the future, and could even be potentially cancelled, it's will be filmed by a major film studio by a major director, and seems to be a lock to be produced. I would 301: 607:
Thanks for directing me to the guideline, however, there is at least one reason for keeping the article for now - it would save anyone the trouble of having to recreate it from scratch.
121: 154: 354:
per MichaelQSchmidt. This project has generated enough buzz that it has acquired a certain notability, but the Alien (franchise) already provides enough coverage for now.—
667:
That would be true if you're already familiar with IMDb, but not everyone is. Frankly, the basis of my disagreement with you here is that I don't agree with the
275: 565:
exists primarily because so many film projects never see completion (I believe, in fact, that more films die in the idea stages than actually get made).
458:
so that it can be expanded and better sourced. I would be glad to advise on how to prepare the article for an eventual return to mainspace.
94: 89: 98: 81: 17: 175: 455: 142: 806: 434: 235: 221: 677: 640: 612: 548: 510: 653:, so nothing useful to future editors is lost if we redirect this there. An IMDb link takes literally seconds to find. -- 825: 136: 36: 802: 430: 231: 132: 467: 412: 343: 69: 520: 824:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
810: 793: 789: 767: 742: 707: 681: 673: 662: 644: 636: 630: 616: 608: 602: 552: 544: 537: 514: 506: 497: 470: 438: 415: 382: 365: 346: 316: 290: 261: 239: 225: 200: 63: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
182: 191:
Film has not yet entered production. Too soon for a page likely to be littered with rumour and speculation.
85: 391:
does allow that occasional exceptions might occur, the topic is curently far better covered and sourced at
460: 405: 336: 747: 582: 400: 785: 763: 703: 658: 626: 598: 533: 493: 378: 257: 215: 168: 148: 58: 396: 781: 755: 693: 650: 481: 444: 392: 326: 312: 286: 196: 77: 49: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
635:
Any of the material there is potentially helpful to future editors, including the IMDb link.
359: 751: 668: 562: 485: 388: 331: 738: 759: 699: 654: 622: 594: 529: 489: 374: 253: 570: 566: 53: 308: 282: 192: 115: 355: 230:
If the film is cancelled, THEN delete the page? This, to me, makes more sense.
734: 691:
coverage, not on uncertain future coverage. With a few notable exceptions (
698:
which we inevitably wind up reporting mostly on rumors and speculation. --
733:. Sources look ok so its not crystal ball, but still a bit too sketchy. 395:. If the nominated article were far more comprehensive, it might 488:& the fact that the topic is already better covered there. -- 818:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
784:. I see notability and RS to support the article's existance. -- 649:
Like I said, all of the material is already presented better at
585:, so it isn't really within our scope to cover topics that 523:
from the director. The director being highly notable is an
754:
and the fact that the topic is already better covered at
111: 107: 103: 519:
This does not address the concerns of the nomination,
213:
remove all rumors in the article though.--Esprit15d •
167: 577:
significant coverage, not on the assumption that it
302:
list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions
581:such coverage at some unknown point in the future. 528:
the bottom-of-the-barrel internet rumor variety. --
181: 399:... but it currently is not.. and so does not... 373:there are 3 sources that is enough for notability 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 828:). No further edits should be made to this page. 252:the page. This, to me, makes the most sense. -- 561:enter production, it may not. It hasn't yet. 8: 587:might be notable at some point in the future 456:User:Anthony of the Desert/Prometheus (film) 330:article as one of those rare exceptions to 296: 270: 276:list of Film-related deletion discussions 300:: This debate has been included in the 274:: This debate has been included in the 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 750:isn't the central issue here. It's 505:. Film project by major director. 24: 593:in one of our other articles. -- 782:Alien_(franchise)#Alien_Prequel 756:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 651:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 591:already covered more thoroughly 482:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 478:Delete & redirect the title 445:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 393:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 327:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 50:Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel 583:Knowledge (XXG) isn't the news 1: 811:21:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC) 794:18:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC) 768:21:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 743:21:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 708:05:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 682:05:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 663:03:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 645:03:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 631:03:15, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 617:03:01, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 603:01:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 553:01:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 538:01:00, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 515:23:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC) 498:05:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 471:08:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 439:16:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 416:21:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 383:05:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC) 366:17:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC) 347:02:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC) 317:00:57, 30 January 2011 (UTC) 291:00:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC) 262:01:32, 6 February 2011 (UTC) 240:16:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 226:23:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 201:20:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 64:01:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC) 521:nor is notability inherited 845: 70:Prometheus (film project) 821:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 575:already having received 803:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz 431:Anthony of the Desert 232:Anthony of the Desert 447:, and it is only in 674:Polisher of Cobwebs 637:Polisher of Cobwebs 609:Polisher of Cobwebs 545:Polisher of Cobwebs 507:Polisher of Cobwebs 573:rely on the topic 397:merit independence 387:Yes and no. While 44:The result was 694:Chinese Democracy 319: 305: 293: 279: 224: 218: 78:Prometheus (film) 836: 823: 463: 408: 339: 306: 280: 220: 214: 186: 185: 171: 119: 101: 48:and redirect to 34: 844: 843: 839: 838: 837: 835: 834: 833: 832: 826:deletion review 819: 461: 406: 337: 244:If the film is 128: 92: 76: 73: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 842: 840: 831: 830: 814: 813: 796: 786:Brunswick Dude 772: 771: 770: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 500: 475: 474: 473: 420: 419: 418: 368: 349: 320: 294: 268: 267: 266: 265: 264: 189: 188: 125: 72: 67: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 841: 829: 827: 822: 816: 815: 812: 808: 804: 800: 797: 795: 791: 787: 783: 780: 776: 773: 769: 765: 761: 757: 753: 749: 746: 745: 744: 740: 736: 732: 729: 709: 705: 701: 696: 695: 690: 685: 684: 683: 679: 675: 670: 666: 665: 664: 660: 656: 652: 648: 647: 646: 642: 638: 634: 633: 632: 628: 624: 620: 619: 618: 614: 610: 606: 605: 604: 600: 596: 592: 588: 584: 580: 576: 572: 568: 564: 560: 556: 555: 554: 550: 546: 541: 540: 539: 535: 531: 526: 522: 518: 517: 516: 512: 508: 504: 501: 499: 495: 491: 487: 483: 479: 476: 472: 469: 468: 465: 464: 457: 452: 451: 446: 442: 441: 440: 436: 432: 428: 424: 421: 417: 414: 413: 410: 409: 402: 398: 394: 390: 386: 385: 384: 380: 376: 372: 369: 367: 363: 362: 357: 353: 350: 348: 345: 344: 341: 340: 333: 328: 324: 321: 318: 314: 310: 303: 299: 295: 292: 288: 284: 277: 273: 269: 263: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 242: 241: 237: 233: 229: 228: 227: 223: 217: 212: 208: 205: 204: 203: 202: 198: 194: 184: 180: 177: 174: 170: 166: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 141: 138: 134: 131: 130:Find sources: 126: 123: 117: 113: 109: 105: 100: 96: 91: 87: 83: 79: 75: 74: 71: 68: 66: 65: 62: 61: 57: 56: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 820: 817: 798: 778: 774: 730: 692: 688: 590: 586: 578: 574: 558: 524: 502: 477: 466: 459: 449: 448: 426: 422: 411: 404: 370: 360: 351: 342: 335: 322: 297: 271: 249: 245: 210: 206: 190: 178: 172: 164: 157: 151: 145: 139: 129: 59: 54: 45: 43: 31: 28: 579:may receive 423:Strong keep 325:for now to 155:free images 748:WP:CRYSTAL 211:definitely 779:mergefrom 760:IllaZilla 731:Weak Keep 700:IllaZilla 655:IllaZilla 623:IllaZilla 595:IllaZilla 557:The film 530:IllaZilla 525:indicator 490:IllaZilla 375:Thisbites 309:• Gene93k 283:• Gene93k 254:IllaZilla 207:Weak keep 689:existing 462:Schmidt, 407:Schmidt, 352:Redirect 338:Schmidt, 323:Redirect 222:contribs 122:View log 55:lifebaka 401:for now 248:, THEN 193:magnius 161:WP refs 149:scholar 95:protect 90:history 752:WP:NFF 669:WP:NFF 563:WP:NFF 486:WP:NFF 484:, per 389:WP:NFF 332:WP:NFF 250:create 133:Google 99:delete 735:Szzuk 427:Alien 176:JSTOR 137:books 116:views 108:watch 104:links 16:< 807:talk 799:Keep 790:talk 777:and 775:Keep 764:talk 758:. -- 739:talk 704:talk 678:talk 659:talk 641:talk 627:talk 613:talk 599:talk 571:WP:N 569:and 567:WP:V 549:talk 534:talk 511:talk 503:Keep 494:talk 450:very 435:talk 379:talk 371:keep 361:talk 313:talk 298:Note 287:talk 272:Note 258:talk 246:made 236:talk 216:talk 197:talk 169:FENS 143:news 112:logs 86:talk 82:edit 46:keep 559:may 480:to 356:RJH 307:-- 281:-- 183:TWL 120:– ( 809:) 792:) 766:) 741:) 706:) 680:) 661:) 643:) 629:) 615:) 601:) 551:) 536:) 513:) 496:) 437:) 403:. 381:) 364:) 334:. 315:) 304:. 289:) 278:. 260:) 238:) 219:• 199:) 163:) 114:| 110:| 106:| 102:| 97:| 93:| 88:| 84:| 60:++ 52:. 805:( 788:( 762:( 737:( 702:( 676:( 657:( 639:( 625:( 611:( 597:( 547:( 532:( 509:( 492:( 433:( 377:( 358:( 311:( 285:( 256:( 234:( 195:( 187:) 179:· 173:· 165:· 158:· 152:· 146:· 140:· 135:( 127:( 124:) 118:) 80:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
Alien (franchise)#Alien Prequel
lifebaka
++
01:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Prometheus (film project)
Prometheus (film)
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
magnius
talk
20:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.