Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perfect Stranger

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Owen× ☎ 15:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to IMDB there is in fact a movie with this title planned. However, production has now apparently pushed back, so that shooting hasn't even started. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and we have no way of knowing what changes will happen before this movie finally actually exists (assuming it does get made.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Goodbye stranger, it's been nice. You're off to delete paradise. Didn't want to keep you at all, 'cause Wiki is not a crystal ba-aall. Thank you, Supertramp. Lord Bob 15:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, notably notable planning. Kappa 15:15, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clearly, you don't know how Hollywood works. --Calton | Talk 00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - They don't call it "Development Hell" for nothing.--Isotope23 18:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete crystal ball. I don't understand Kappa's argument. Dottore So 19:57, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Notable" is Kappa's all-purpose, one-size-fits-all adjective. --Calton | Talk 00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, giving Kappa the benefit of the doubt, it is possible sometimes for the planning for an event to meet the criteria of notability and verifiability even before an event occurs. However, anyone passingly familiar with Hollywood moviemaking realizes that those are plans so subject to change that they do not meet those criteria. By the time this movie gets made, if it ever actually gets made, it could easily have a different title, two different stars and be changed from a suspense thriller to a dark comedy. I would like to give Kappa the benefit of the doubt and think that he actually put some thought into this and just made a mistaken assumption, rather than that he put thought into "gee, what flimsy argument can I make to cover my reflexive vote of 'Keep'?" However, I've seen his record... -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:08, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the personal attack. This film is on record as "announced" for both Halle Berry and Bruce Willis, so anyone interested in their careers would want to know want happened to it even if it was never made. Kappa 02:48, 14 October 2005 (UTC)\[reply]
      • Even assuming -- for the sake of argument -- that Wikipedia should automatically be containing information on movies that were actually made with given stars and on movies that were announced but never made, what exactly is the objection to waiting until we know which it is? -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:20, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • It would be a waste of effort to recreate it, and wikipedia would contain no information about it until that time. Plus we might forget. Kappa 23:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While I find that Kappa's penchant for inclusiveness often verges on the extreme, I find he usually musters an argument that should be taken seriously and is much more than just a cover for a knee-jerk keep vote. When I stated I don't understand what he means, I was being quite literal: viz, what is notably planning? Dottore So 11:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • • • I second this sentiment. Kappa's dilligence and consistency is highly laudable, even though I often disagree with him. He's the true "advocate of the unloved article." If I knew how to make barnstars, I'd make a Clarence Darrow one, just for Kappa. Xoloz 17:09, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It's clumsy typing, halfway between "notable planning" and "notably in planning". 11:35, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Carnildo 23:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not only a crystal ball article, but a deeply uninformative one. --Calton | Talk 00:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete'. Not enough there worth keeping. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 02:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete existence in doubt; planning not verifiable. Xoloz 17:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I seriously doubt that we will "forget" to create a new article on a Bruce Willis/Halle Berry movie should it ever get made. More likely is that we will forget about this article if this movie remains unmade and thus have an inaccurate and useless article cluttering the encyclopedia. Gamaliel 18:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and Redirect to the disambig page Perfect Strangers as a likely typo. If the movie ends up being made, we can always write an article then. Colin Kimbrell 07:09, 16 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.