Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unknown Creature, The(2005 movie)

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 delete. Independent films with no reliable sources or much of anything else does not assert notability seicer | talk | contribs 13:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Unknown Creature, The(2005 movie)

Unknown Creature, The(2005 movie) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

"Independent" film without real release, reliable sources, or evidence of notability. Was PROD'ded, bringing to AfD due to complaint by creator on his talk page as a response to the PROD notification. gnfnrf (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Even IMDB doesn't have anything, and that is user edited and usually includes plenty of nonnotable movies as well. The fact that it had a $200 budget (less than the average porn flick) doesn't support the notability, nor the fact that it wasn't ever screened (straight to dvd/vhs). It claims it was shot to look like it was filmed by an amatur, which likely, isn't far from the truth. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - As original PROD-er. Future film, fails WP:NFF and WP:CRYSTAL What I mean to say is this is a student film with no assertion of notability. TN‑X-Man 21:28, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

  Comment The film was released 3 years ago. I agree with the delete, but how can crystal ball or NFF apply here?? No one is questioning its existance, only its notability. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• Comment The answer to that, of course, is that I'm a dope. I was thinking of another film article I had PROD-ed. Thanks for the heads-up. TN‑X-Man 23:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - almost pathologically non-notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Sadly, my own search found very little. One might have hoped that after 3 years it might have been reviewed somewhere. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, as I seconded the prod. Fails WP:MOVIE, as established above. Cliff smith ^talk 00:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete: The movie really was made for just $200.00 plus a little more, I still have the reciepts of the stuff I had bought in order to shoot it. The reason IMDB hasn't listed it is because it's not one of the titles avalible on CreateSpace.com and they submit it to IMDB for you. I was disapointed on how low the sales where. wikipedia had orders for wikipedia not to delete it. You say you got rules, we have rules to and one is this "We do not support those who slander or blackmail those who work for us or ourselfs." Now whoever first nominated that we be deleted won't be able to find a part in our next movie just for that, unless he or she was getting paid for what they did. It is to be reposted by wiki staff a.s.a.p

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.