Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Star (2017 film)

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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Star (2017 film)

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

Does not satisfy film notability guidelines as an unreleased film that does not appear to be in principal photography yet and so is not notable.

Issues could be raised about whether this article is promotional in nature also. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:49, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Um, how can it be in principal photography when it's an ANIMATED film? Also, according to ComingSoon.net, the film is in production. And how is this article promotional? It's neutral, it's well-sourced, how is the article questionable? Superchunk22 (talk) 05:35, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the film's already got its very own website. Here it is. http://www.thestarmovie.com/ Not to mention that the film has an official release date, which has actually been moved up from December 8, 2017 to November 10, 2017. That should prove that the film's happening. Superchunk22 (talk) 06:27, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Superchunk22: If you are familiar with WP:NFF, then you know that you are required to establish that the animated film you have written about "is clearly out of the pre-production process, meaning that the final animation frames are actively being drawn and/or rendered, and final recordings of voice-overs and music have commenced." Can you support that? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, there's the link to prove it, and it's from a reliable source. Here it clearly shows that the film is out of the pre-production process. http://www.comingsoon.net/movie/the-star-2017 Superchunk22 (talk) 07:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's also another link proving that this article is notable. As you can see, this article is out of the pre-production process. http://www.movieinsider.com/m14507/the-star Superchunk22 (talk) 07:18, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And another link... http://www.movieinsider.com/c411/sony-pictures-animation/status/production Superchunk22 (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There, I made it clear in the article that The Star is currently in production. Superchunk22 (talk) 08:19, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, is my article appropriate for Wikipedia or not? I've been waiting for four days to know and I'm kinda getting impatient. :@Robert McClenon:, is my article appropriate? Superchunk22 (talk) 23:02, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - User:Superchunk22 - I don't know why I am being pinged. I have offered my opinion. The discussion will run for at least another three days. This AFD will be closed by an uninvolved administrator in three days, or extended and closed later. Please read the deletion policy and Articles for Deletion. If you want general comments about the deletion process and deletion debates, you may ask at the Teahouse or the Help Desk. You may ask for other editors to participate there or at WP:WikiProject Film. I have offered my opinion, and the AFD will be closed by an uninvolved administrator. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 07:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 07:20, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:31, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Currently only the Wrap and Variety sources are in depth coverage of the topic. The rest are official or passing mention. I would be more comfortable if it had more than two real sources, and I probably wouldn't pass it at AfC in its current condition. Since it does seem to be from some major names, there will probably be more written about it. But if it is kept, no prejudice against renominating if more isn't written. Also nothing against userfying for a few weeks so that it can have some time to get some meat on it's bones. TimothyJosephWood 21:16, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've added two sources from the website Patheos that focus entirely on The Star. Superchunk22 (talk) 05:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it's coming soon and is on the studio's promotion list, according to this.[[1]] Unlike company press releases, which are frowned upon here, studio press releases indicate there is marketing money being put behind the movie and that it's going to be on the cultural radar soon.Timtempleton (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2017 (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.