Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled Miranda July project

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 merge to Miranda July#Other film work. Sandstein 09:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Miranda July project

[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)

WP:TOOSOON article about an unreleased film. As always, Wikipedia does not keep an article about every film that can be minimally sourced as having entered the production pipeline -- with extremely rare exceptions for hypernotable films on the order of the Star Wars franchise, most films are not notable until they have been released, and thereby received reviews from reputable film critics, and a small bit of initial casting announcement coverage is not enough to make it a special case yet. Just because the director has a WP:BLP does not automatically mean we need to rush-job a premature article the moment she announces that she's working on something new — if you don't even know a title or anything about the plot yet, let alone an actual release date, then you need to wait until you do know those things before a standalone article becomes warranted. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the film passes notability guidelines. Let's be honest the only reason this is being discussed is that it doesn't have a proper title, but that is not a reason to delete the article. As it passes NFF, it should remain - we'll get a title soon enough, and the page can be moved accordingly. Somethingwickedly (talk) 01:02, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NFF is not automatically passed by every not yet released film that can show one or more sources — virtually every film that enters the production pipeline at all can always show a couple of casting announcements and a "shooting has commenced" piece in the film industry trade papers like Variety or Deadline or The Hollywood Reporter or Playback. For a film that hasn't been released yet to become notable enough for inclusion while it's still in the production pipeline, it has to generate a lot more coverage than most films get — something close to the Star Wars/Marvel/James Bond level of coverage. The ability to show just any sourcing at all is not automatically always enough, because very few films could ever actually not show two or three or four sources during the production process. Bearcat (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:43, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:43, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:53, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 00:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge by default to Miranda July#Other film work. Expand summary style proportionate to the source material. czar 03:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Czar above. I intended to !keep, but on review of the sourcing I don't see that there is actual confirmation from a reliable source that principal photography has begun. The source in the article actually states that production is set to begin in May 2018, which was still in the future when the source was written. This is explicitly addressed, and ruled out, in WP:NFF. A very quick search failed to reveal proper confirmation, although perhaps someone w/ access to industry sources could do better. Still, it the absence of any suggestion the project has stalled, the merger is an appropriate resolution. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 06:41, 10 March 2019 (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.