Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hit By Lightning

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 keep. Nom withdrawn, no dissenting !votes Black Kite (talk) 09:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hit By Lightning

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

May be WP:TOOSOON. Movie has not been released yet. No references cited in page. SmileBlueJay97 talk 09:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Did you or serial drive-by tagger PamD read WP:BEFORE and do any checking? Within five seconds I found this, this and this. It's going to get a general release in a couple of months, and I'm sure just going off the cast list there will be a TON of coverage. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 11:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So now you're saying it meets the three policy guides (and one essay) you quoted before, but now only fails the one essay, linked above. Not having a release date does not equate to being non-notable. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. SmileBlueJay97, Go read WP:NFF (paragraph 3). Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: To be honest. I thought you were asking us to nominate the ariticle for AfD with this edit. This exact same article has been deleted by Admin NawlinWiki before under criteria G11 and A7 of speedy deletion. After Mike Ades (talk · contribs) re-created this same article again, I tagged it for speedy deletion as it has been deleted before. User:PamD removed the speedy deletion tag and nominated it for PROD instead. Then your {AfD is over there ----->} comment came. I am honestly confused with what is going on. SmileBlueJay97 talk 13:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SmileBlueJay97:: Please... User:PamD was correct to remove the speedy as indeed, films are not eligible for A7... specially when diligent WP:BEFORE can show the film article as improvable. Her proposed deletion was a slightly better choice, as it called in others eyes. And when HE declined the prod, it was incorrect of you to think this edit called for deletion, when it simply calls for others to assist through regular editing in showing the film as meeting WP:NF. And what was lost on you was User:Lugnuts's own de-prodding and his "(decline. AfD is over there ----->)" acting to bring your lack of proper WP:BEFORE into scrutiny. And toward your "No references cited in page"... so what? Notability is dependent upon sources BEING available and not on their use or not to cite an article. Had you actually looked before leaping, you would have found the coverage in independent sources showing the film as having had a public screeining. Hope that clears up your "confusion". Oops. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It took you three minutes to add the prod tag and then PamD took all of one minute after moving the article to add the prod and notability tags. Clearly WP:CIR before doing this. The notability tag is an oxymoron - the article is either notable or it isn't - there is no grey area. And I've shown it is notable within a few minutes. Tell me how many minutes did you both spend searching for sources before adding the tag? You can round that up to the nearest 10 minutes. And show your workings too. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 18:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

Keep this brand new article and continue improvements. The film premiered July 23, 2014 at the Just For Laughs Festival and has coverage to meet WP:NF. AS it has screened and has coverage, SmileBlueJay97 can rest his worries. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:05, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And just to be clear, the film premiered July 23, 2014 and will have a US release on October 31, 2014: French-language source English-language translation It might be fair to for the nominator to acknowledge this and withdraw his deletion nomination. His choice. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per MichaelQSchmidt, and to draw back a bit from wp:BITEing a newbie. Seems like the nomination was in haste, without wp:BEFORE performed. Of course if a film has once been deleted for being "too soon", later it may not be justified, you have to check! And, the speedy deletion, then restoration, then a prod, then this AFD, and other negative notes, have all been unduly hard on new contributor User:Mike Ades. Mike Ades, per IMDB listing for film, is one of 2 executive producers, but there is no prohibition from associated persons writing about a topic. Sure advise him pay attention to wp:COI, but there is no problem with the contribution at all. --do ncr am 01:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yup... specially as Mike brought us a two-sentence stub and then did nothing else to edit the article... hopefully not chased away as a contributor. The current start-class version bears little resemblance to the nominated stub. THAT'S how we build an encyclopedia. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 02:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. As the notability of the film has been sourced, I withdraw my deletion nomination. SmileBlueJay97 talk 07:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also apologize for not checking beforehand. I tagged it for speedy because the exact same article has been speedy deleted minutes before by Admin NawlinWiki under criteria G11 and A7 of speedy deletion. I assumed the administrator had checked before he/she deleted the article. SmileBlueJay97 talk 07:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@ SmileBlueJay97: Thank you for the withdrawal. I followed your link to the deletion log, but found no action by NawlinWiki in regards this titel, nor did I find any earlier contributor being notified of an erelier speedy. I did find your August 19 notification to User:Hit By Lightning (film) (now blocked for username issues), AND your August 19 notification to User:Mike Ades. I did follow THESE edits diff-by-diff and saw a newcomer completely unfamiliar with wiki markup and mos:film. But I found no evidence that an earlier article was speedied... only that userpage resembling an article which was blanked by its owner. Can you share a diff for the earlier speedy? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.}

(copy-paste from deletion log) 15:33, August 19, 2014 NawlinWiki (talk | contribs) deleted page Hit By Lightning (Film) (Multiple reasons: speedy deletion criteria G11, A7) SmileBlueJay97 talk 08:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough SmileBlueJay97, and with the time-code I found what you did... but in looking through his contribs, I was unable to find any such action for that time and date, and still could not find him notifying an author. Just goes to show that even experienced admins can err. G11 is an iffy call for a two-sentence improvable stub and A7 does not apply to films. Had he done his own due diligence, he would have learned that by the article's creation on August 19, the film had already had its debut and the thing was eminently sourcable. Well, NawlinWiki... ? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 08:42, 21 August 2014 (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.