Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lola James

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 15:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lola James

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The film was only covered by reliable sources when it was first announced and has received virtually no mentions since. I could only find three pages that have referenced Lola James since 2022:

Sunday Times interview - Peltz says that she cut her husband's speaking role from the film and that she was making the movie when trying to coordinate her wedding dress. (October 2022)
Daily Mail article - Briefly mentions that Peltz posted "raunchy" set photos and mentions that the film is in post-production, but Daily Mail is deprecated and was the only publication I could find saying that. (February 2023)
Yahoo News article - Peltz posts a photo wearing a fake baby bump and her fans think she's actually pregnant. (February 2023)

This seems like a pretty clear-cut case of ~~WP:CRYSTAL~~ WP:TOOSOON given that all the info available about the movie is its cast and crew, the fact that it's been filmed, and that Peltz cut her husand out of it. Even the "crew" part is fuzzy, as I couldn't find sources for the cinematographer, editor, or composers. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 14:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 14:50, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems like there are a few more sources but these just repeat stuff from each other, which suggests there isn't much to say. It's WP:TOOSOON to say anything about the project. JMWt (talk) 15:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per source assessment and the ones I found online, which repeat the same stuff. However, not particularly opposed to draftifying and publishing if the film does eventually receive more coverage. NotAGenious (talk) 09:16, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator comment: I'd also support draftifying the article if that's preferable to deletion. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 17:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree it seems WP:TOOSOON, though draftify would be ok in case things change. Flurrious (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2023 (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.