Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled Marc Lawrence/Hugh Grant Comedy

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. postdlf (talk) 02:06, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Marc Lawrence/Hugh Grant Comedy[edit]

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

Delete: Film is already in production, but shouldn't we wait until the producers actually come up with a title? Freshh (talk) 19:39, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Ï¿½ (talk) 19:42, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That same policy does allow that future events might be written of somewhere, as long as properly sourced. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:33, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NFF. MarnetteD | Talk 20:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Articles can be kept with untitled name, and if it should not keep then redirect it to its Director, better then deletion.-- Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! ^{( T - C - G )} 03:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

INCUBATE' as being only slightly TOO SOON. Found a few independent sources speaking of this project: The Wrap (November 2012) speaking toward casting We Got This Covered (November,2012) also speaking toward casting Hollywood Reporter (March 2013) announces more casting and speaks toward April 2013 filming and Indie Wire (April 2013) confirming principle filming as having begun. We almost have WP:NFF met, untitled or not. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC) (STRUCK.See below)[reply]
Keep per the notability guidelines for future films since it is verified that filming is already underway. WP:CRYSTAL does not apply here because there is no unverifiable speculation. Instead, we are able to verify the ongoing production of this film. Per the aforementioned notability guidelines, this is an acceptable threshold to maintain a stand-alone article. Coverage of a film's production generally means that there will be coverage of a film's reception; both are tied to who has made the film and/or who is in the film. Considering the director and the star for this film, both with significant bodies of work, I find it highly unlikely that this film will lack in coverage. It would be detrimental to delete this topic. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:18, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Eric. Title notwithstanding, WP:NFF is met and more is becoming available almost daily. It serves the project and its readers for this topic to be included and the article about it expanded over time and through regular editing. Thus, I have stricken my incubation consideration above. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:30, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 13:10, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, wow, a WP:HAMMER on a film is rare. Sources only confirm that it will happen, but nothing seems to have happened yet. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Principal photography has begun, according to this. If there's a lack of coverage since, it doesn't mean anything. It's not the kind of film to have a fan base following every detail of production. Erik (talk | contribs) 04:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as filming is confirmed to have started, so it satisfies the guidelines. Though I must say I recommend it be renamed, unless the current title is officially "Untitled Marc Lawrence/Hugh Grant Comedy." Beerest355 Talk 20:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Forget WP:NFF and WP:CRYSTAL (both of which would seem to apply). They are not necessary in this case because the subject currently fails WP:GNG. There are no reliable sources cited. The two sources appear to be blogs, along with an external link to IMDB. None of these sites, to my knowledge, qualifies as a reliable source. ‑Scottywong | speak _ 20:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure how IndieWire is a blog. Beerest355 Talk 23:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scottywong, there is coverage in the trade papers about this film:

In essence, this is the same kind of film as the previous Lawrence-Grant collaboration, Did You Hear About the Morgans? I am positive that this film will garner the same amount of reception (which is way more than enough for notability purposes). I think it's unnecessary to delete this article only to bring it back again. It's a film in production whose development was noteworthy and whose reception, based on similar trends, will also be noteworthy. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, Scotty... a closer will doubtless note Erik's bringing forth multiple accepted reliable sources such as Variety 1 2 3 Hollywood Reporter 1 2 3 and will doubtless note Beerest355's pointing out the quite accepted Indie Wire as acceptable, reliable, and independent, and will doubtless conclude that evidence of multiple available independent sources shows the TOPIC as easily meeting the GNG... a determination which kinda pokes holes in any inadvertant implication by anyone that reliable sources do not exist. Per WP:N, when they DO exist, they need not be citing an article. The policy you cite as reason to delete is one that specifically allows that a future event can be covered within these pages if properly supported by available sources. Let's give three cheers for WP:BEFORE.Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...AND point here being that your concern was easy enough to address through regular editing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 23:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have expanded the article to be more full-bodied based on the references I mentioned above. The topic meets WP:GNG in having significant coverage about the topic, and it meets WP:NFF because filming is underway. I am not sure why WP:NFF is being cited for deletion if we have verified that filming began. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Change to Keep per the sources found since I posted. Especially the fact that filming has begun. One question - Would it be preferable to remove Hugh Grant from the title and just leave Marc Lawrence since he is the director? I know that is splitting hairs but most other untitled films I've seen over the years acknowledge the director not the stars of the film. MarnetteD | Talk 15:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with making such a move. Maybe Untitled Marc Lawrence film? Erik (talk | contribs) 15:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is the one that I would think is proper to use as well. MarnetteD | Talk 15:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources provided above by User:Erik. Simply put, the topic passes Wikipedia's General notability guideline for an article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:27, 20 July 2013 (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.