Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grim Trigger

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. Kurykh (talk) 01:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Grim Trigger

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

Delete. WP:TOOSOON article about a film which is only just now entering the production pipeline ("commenced principal photography on February 6, 2017" -- and that's not a typo, because one of the references here is a casting call dated December 2016). This is referenced exclusively to primary sources, except for a single glancing namecheck of its existence in a Playback article about its casting director -- and there's a conflict of interest here, as the article was created by a person with a direct professional relationship with the film's producer. As always, Wikipedia is not an advance publicity database on which a film gets to have a primary sourced article the moment it enters the production pipeline -- except very occasionally in the case of exceptionally high profile projects like Star Wars eps 8 and 9 where the media obsessively publish every scrap of advance information they can get their hands on, most films outside of that rarefied class of megaprojects don't get articles on here until they're actually released and garnering actual critical reviews to pass WP:NFILM. No prejudice against recreation if and when that happens, but today is not the time for an article about an indie film that is only just starting photography. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 16:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 16:59, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pleas note that I have corrected the verb tense from "commenced" to "commences."

Unfortunately, I have to once again correct Bearcat when he/she conflates by Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" with the person with the same name who is the CEO of a film studio in the city of Greater Sudbury, Ontario. Once again, this is incorrect as while my Wiki username is "Davidjosephanselmo" it is not my actual name LMFAO. Similar to how "Bearcat" is not a "bearcat" (whatever that may be) and his/her actual name is probably not "Bearcat." My username is an inside joke, and not my actual identity so there is NO conflict of interest. Furthermore, the feature Grim Trigger is NOT being produced in any way whatsoever with David Joseph Anselmo and/or his studio. Finally, I included in my sources an Ontario government link regarding its financial participation in Grim Trigger. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 17:14, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As I've already pointed out in the other discussion in which you raised this argument, it doesn't matter whether you are personally David Joseph Anselmo, or just a person who's using "David Joseph Anselmo" for a username as an "inside joke" — if you have any form of personal association with the article topics whatsoever, then you still have a direct conflict of interest. If you're in any position whereby using his name can qualify as an "inside joke", then you still can't start articles about anybody or anything he's associated with in any way whatsoever. And "an Ontario government link regarding its financial participation" does not assist notability — a film does not get an article on here until it's the subject of reliable source coverage in media. Press releases do not assist notability, casting calls do not assist notability, the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund's spreadsheet of current funding projects does not assist notability, and on and so forth — it's media coverage, media coverage, media coverage and/or media coverage, and nothing else. Bearcat (talk) 17:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please note Bearcat that, once again, the feature Grim Trigger is NOT being produced in any way whatsoever with David Joseph Anselmo and/or his studio. Think of it this way: I have no relation to the now deceased Steve Jobs. Even if I create the Wiki username "Stevejobs" I still have no relation to Steve Jobs OTHER than the fact that I have used his hame as my Wiki username. And I might do this as an inside joke between myself and someone(s) else who is not or related to Steve Jobs. Make sense? Once again, my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" is an inside joke, but it is not an inside joke between myself and David Joseph Anselmo. I can't make this ANYMORE clear. Hopefully you can now stop kicking this dead horse :) The film was mentioned as going into production in Playback magazine, which is Canada's version of the US's Variety. How does this "not assist notability"? Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 17:39, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's review this again: you're using the username "Davidjosephanselmo" to create and edit articles about people who live and work in the same city as the real David Joseph Anselmo, and films being made by those same people. Whether you are DJA or are just somebody using DJA's name as an "inside joke", you clearly do have some form of direct personal association with Sudbury's film industry — these people and films wouldn't even be on your radar if you didn't — and so you still have a conflict of interest regardless of who you are or aren't. And, as I advised you on your talk page, if you're telling the truth that you're not DJA, then we have to block you for violating our rules against usernames that impersonate other people.

And again, this film was glancingly namechecked in a Playback article that is not about this film. That is not the kind of "coverage" that it takes to get a film into Wikipedia in and of itself. A film has to be the subject of reliable source coverage, not just namechecked in reliable source coverage about something or someone else, before it qualifies for a Wikipedia article. That's why that article doesn't assist this film's notability: it's not about this film. Bearcat (talk) 18:02, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bearcat There is no relation between the feature Grim Trigger and the CEO of the film studio located in the same city that Grim Trigger is being produced. I just checked to see if this CEO was on IMDB, and he is under the name "David Anselmo" http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2156926/ . My Wiki username, "Davidjosephanselmo," which, again, I chose years ago, is not my actual name, nor am I trying to "impersonate" this CEO, who is not a celebrity or known in any significant way. I note that he does not have a Wiki page. I have never written anything on Wiki regarding this individual and/or his studio and/or his film & TV productions. Again, difficult to argue that I am impersonating someone with a project -- Grim Trigger -- that is in no way related to him. You claim to have made some "connection" with Grim Trigger because my Wiki username "Davidjosephanselmo" is very similar to this CEO "David Anselmo." Other than this connection, there is NO connection, and this CEO has no relation to Grim Trigger. I am not trying to make a connection between this CEO and Grim Trigger, you are. I am underlying that there is NO connection. Bearcat Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every article you've ever created on Wikipedia has been about either a person who works in Sudbury's film industry or a film made in Sudbury, and you expect me to believe that it's a pure coincidence that your username just randomly happens to also be the name of Sudbury's film industry kingpin? As an administrator I have the ability to check when an account was first registered, and your Wikipedia account was registered in 2013, at which time DJA was already the alpha dog of Sudbury's film industry — he's not some random guy who came along years after you were already using this username, but a guy who was already professionally associated with the very same other people you've been creating articles about. It's simply not credible that Sudbury film industry topics like Zahra Golafshani and Ernest Riffe and Andrew David and Mathieu Séguin and Grim Trigger were on your radar as potential article topics, and yet your username matching the name of the Sudbury film industry's kingpin is a pure "I've never heard of the guy" coincidence. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, Bearcat, you are incorrect in that every article that I've ever created on Wiki "has been about either a person who works in Sudbury's film industry or a film made in Sudbury." If you consider "David Anselmo" (as he is listed on IMDB) to be the "alpha dog of Sudbury's film industry" then that is your prerogative. From what I know, he is best known as the Hallmark TV Movie-of-the Week producer, and his "studio" is actually an unconverted and dilapidated community skating arena. Regardless, you'll notice that non of those individuals that you have listed -- Zahra Golafshani, Ernest Riffe, Andrew David and Mathieu Séguin -- have anything to do with this same "David Anselmo," who, AGAIN, has nothing to do with Grim Trigger. You are proving my point that, once again, I am not this CEO, and this individual has, once again, nothing to do with Grim Trigger. Only in your mind Bearcat is there a connection between this CEO and Grim Trigger. Davidjosephanselmo (talk) 19:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The articles you have created have been Darwin (2015 film), Your Name Here (2015 film), Grim Trigger, Ernest Riffe, Andrew David, Ivan Gekoff, Zahra Golafshani and Mathieu Séguin. Every single one of those articles is directly connected in some way to Sudbury — even Gekoff, the only article that doesn't have the word "Sudbury" in it, still contains the statement that he's a frequent collaborator of a director who does live and work in Sudbury. So no, I'm not incorrect about that — your article creations have pertained entirely to Sudbury's film industry.

And again, the way somebody's profile happens to be listed on IMDb does not prove anything. His "our CEO" profile on NOFS/Hideaway's website gives his name as David Joseph Anselmo, and virtually all of the media coverage about him that does exist gives his name as David Joseph Anselmo. So one profile eliding the "Joseph" does not constitute proof that this is all just a coincidence.

Sudbury has a small film industry, in which nobody associated with it can credibly claim to have no form of association with any of the others. Even if they've never actually worked together on a particular film project, they will still inevitably at least know each other in some capacity — the industry isn't large enough for them not to. Whether DJA is directly involved in the production of Grim Trigger or not, he still personally knows the people who are, and has directly worked with some or all of them on other projects, so it's still a COI because there's still a direct personal association involved. Bearcat (talk) 19:19, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Despite claims to the contrary by the OP, he has a COI in this article, and not hiding it well. Also under fits under WP:TOOSOON. JerrySa1 (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unreleased film which has not yet received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The coverage just isn't out there and what's in the article isn't enough to show notability. The only independent source mentions the film very briefly, to where it would only be considered a WP:TRIVIAL source. It's at best WP:TOOSOON for this to have an article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:49, 6 February 2017 (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.