The result was keep. Consensus is that enough sourcing exists to establish notability, as shown by changes since the nomination. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Future films are not notable without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. None provided, none found. Disputed prod. SummerPhD ( talk) 15:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
*Userfy - Per
WP:NFF, there is no coverage to show filming has commenced.--
Sodabottle (
talk)
23:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
info@crystalsky.com: 550 5.1.1 User unknown
the domains whois contact - tomc@crystal-sky.com - 550 550 No Such User Here (state 14) The site crystal-sky which they apparently own is now apparently a blog about things like "Take Care of Your Hayabusa Motorcycle Parts" " what drymouth is and how to avoid it"
as for tekken films. who is to say they did not sell the rights to the film to another production company. and the speculation of the robosapian community is not notable unless its sourced. also 16 months in postproduction seems to be quite a long time (if your jan 2009 date was right.) lastly, you seem to be dodging the question (asked twice now) of how you know the sites under construction? because it appears to be more like dead. As someone who has invested in movie production companies (not this one), I can tell you they come and go..- Tracer9999 ( talk) 17:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Registrar: FastDomain Inc.
Provider Name....: BlueHost.Com Provider Whois...: whois.bluehost.com Provider Homepage: http://www.bluehost.com/ Domain Name: CRYSTALSKY.COM Created on..............: 2005-08-24 07: 09: 30 GMT Expires on..............: 2014-09-06 16: 41: 06 GMT Last modified on........: 2009-12-04 09: 04: 12 GMT Registrant Info: (FAST-12870383) Crystal Sky 1901 Avenue of the Stars 605 Los Angeles California 90067 United States Phone: 1.3108430223 Fax..: Email: tomc@crystal-sky.com
Crystal Sky is not an ISP and therefore does not concern itself with hosting its own domain. The registration details are provided by FastDomain Inc. They list the address for Crystal Sky at Ste. 605, 1901 Avenue of the Stars. Obviously that is not the address of Crystal Sky's corporate office and is the address of Artists Only Management which is a sub-company of Crystal Sky, so already we are seeing a discrepancy in the information provided by FastDomain Inc. Not much point in speculating about the email contact, since that is clerical information provided, and could just as easily be a typo or whatever. The crystal-sky.com domain was setup by an entirely differnt registar from the one used by Crystal Sky, so they may or may not have anything to do with that domain. About the only point worth noting that is somehow related to this discussion, is that crystalsky.com is a valid domain until at least September, 2014.
Your speculation that Crystal Sky sold the production rights to the Tekken film is false, as you only need to watch the trailer for the film to see they are indeed the company that produced the film, which was just released a few months ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdUrryP0eWE
The long post-production for Robosapien is because the robot is basically an all CGI character, plus they did some reshoots for the film since they wrapped in NOLA as well. I have visited the Crystal Sky site a number of times, and as I have already stated above it was around a month ago when I visited again, and noticed the site was unavailable and had been replaced by a holding page indicating that the site was under reconstruction, but I'm not sure when the holding page might have gone up. It was actually only a few days ago that the holding page was taken down and is now just returning the "403 Forbidden" error when visiting the site. Does that mean the reconstruction phase will soon be over, don't know, and it's pointless to speculate. I wish you well in your future investments. Lacinius ( talk) 22:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
from WP:NFF
"Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Similarly, films produced in the past, which were either not completed or not distributed, should not have their own articles unless their failure was notable per the guidelines." ..both of these apply at this point and come up as FAIL - Tracer9999 ( talk) 22:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
First question asked, "I see no indication that the "unavailable" Crystalsky.com began a redesign "about a month ago". Do you have some connection to Crystal Sky?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "I mentioned Crystal Sky is currently unavailable and why, just as a courtesy in case someone tried to visit the site and the page would not load." This relates directly back to practically the first thing I said in this discussion, "Also added original plot synopsis back into article which came from the film production company Crystal Sky's own website. Crystalsky.com is currently unavailable because the site is undergoing a redesign, which began about a month ago." Which established in this discussion that I have visited the site, so I don't think it is too much of a stretch to think that someone might visit a site more than one time.
Next question asked, "Id also like to point out crystalsky.com was last archived by archive.org on may 1, 2008 with nothing at all for the year 2009, which is rather strange, are they still in business?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "Crstal Sky must still be in business if another of their productions Tekken was just released in Japan at the end of last month."
Next question asked, "lastly, you seem to be dodging the question (asked twice now) of how you know the sites under construction?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "I have visited the Crystal Sky site a number of times, and as I have already stated above it was around a month ago when I visited again, and noticed the site was unavailable and had been replaced by a holding page indicating that the site was under reconstruction, but I'm not sure when the holding page might have gone up. It was actually only a few days ago that the holding page was taken down and is now just returning the "403 Forbidden" error when visiting the site."
Quite frankly I find it rather silly to ask someone that is clearly using the Internet how they could possibly know a site is under construction. Have you never visited a site more than once over the course of several months, and have you never noticed websites going up and down and changing and being unavailable for maintenance in all your time on the Internet. Is that really such a unique experience? I also find it rather insolent of you to suggest that I have somehow refused to answer the questions that were asked of me in this discussion.
But perhaps reading comprehension is not your strong suit, and as evidence you have demonstrated that quite well in this disscussion about the original article, which began with this comment about the filmofilia.com website. This is your comment from the article history: (cur | prev) 12:45, 9 April 2010 SummerPhD (talk | contribs) (1,409 bytes) (?Plot: -copyright violation [1] and promotional language) (undo)
I then explained that they sourced their information from the crystalsky.com website by my comment, "That site "borrowed" their summary from Crystal Sky as well, and even cite Crystal Sky as the source which can be found on that page just above the poster."
You then indicated that I was still somehow wrong about that point, because it could not possibly be your inflated ego getting in the way, with this comment as typed by you above, "(Incidentally, I don't read "“Robosapien: Rebooted” is scheduled to hit theaters in 2009. [source: Crystal Sky]" as saying "We copied text verbatim from that site.")"
Okay then, please do tell how filmofilia.com was able to "devine" the exact text and provided a direct source link back to crystalsky.com, if they did not copy text verbatim from the production company website? Lacinius ( talk) 14:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. Consensus is that enough sourcing exists to establish notability, as shown by changes since the nomination. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 14:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Future films are not notable without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. None provided, none found. Disputed prod. SummerPhD ( talk) 15:09, 9 April 2010 (UTC) reply
*Userfy - Per
WP:NFF, there is no coverage to show filming has commenced.--
Sodabottle (
talk)
23:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
reply
info@crystalsky.com: 550 5.1.1 User unknown
the domains whois contact - tomc@crystal-sky.com - 550 550 No Such User Here (state 14) The site crystal-sky which they apparently own is now apparently a blog about things like "Take Care of Your Hayabusa Motorcycle Parts" " what drymouth is and how to avoid it"
as for tekken films. who is to say they did not sell the rights to the film to another production company. and the speculation of the robosapian community is not notable unless its sourced. also 16 months in postproduction seems to be quite a long time (if your jan 2009 date was right.) lastly, you seem to be dodging the question (asked twice now) of how you know the sites under construction? because it appears to be more like dead. As someone who has invested in movie production companies (not this one), I can tell you they come and go..- Tracer9999 ( talk) 17:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
Registrar: FastDomain Inc.
Provider Name....: BlueHost.Com Provider Whois...: whois.bluehost.com Provider Homepage: http://www.bluehost.com/ Domain Name: CRYSTALSKY.COM Created on..............: 2005-08-24 07: 09: 30 GMT Expires on..............: 2014-09-06 16: 41: 06 GMT Last modified on........: 2009-12-04 09: 04: 12 GMT Registrant Info: (FAST-12870383) Crystal Sky 1901 Avenue of the Stars 605 Los Angeles California 90067 United States Phone: 1.3108430223 Fax..: Email: tomc@crystal-sky.com
Crystal Sky is not an ISP and therefore does not concern itself with hosting its own domain. The registration details are provided by FastDomain Inc. They list the address for Crystal Sky at Ste. 605, 1901 Avenue of the Stars. Obviously that is not the address of Crystal Sky's corporate office and is the address of Artists Only Management which is a sub-company of Crystal Sky, so already we are seeing a discrepancy in the information provided by FastDomain Inc. Not much point in speculating about the email contact, since that is clerical information provided, and could just as easily be a typo or whatever. The crystal-sky.com domain was setup by an entirely differnt registar from the one used by Crystal Sky, so they may or may not have anything to do with that domain. About the only point worth noting that is somehow related to this discussion, is that crystalsky.com is a valid domain until at least September, 2014.
Your speculation that Crystal Sky sold the production rights to the Tekken film is false, as you only need to watch the trailer for the film to see they are indeed the company that produced the film, which was just released a few months ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdUrryP0eWE
The long post-production for Robosapien is because the robot is basically an all CGI character, plus they did some reshoots for the film since they wrapped in NOLA as well. I have visited the Crystal Sky site a number of times, and as I have already stated above it was around a month ago when I visited again, and noticed the site was unavailable and had been replaced by a holding page indicating that the site was under reconstruction, but I'm not sure when the holding page might have gone up. It was actually only a few days ago that the holding page was taken down and is now just returning the "403 Forbidden" error when visiting the site. Does that mean the reconstruction phase will soon be over, don't know, and it's pointless to speculate. I wish you well in your future investments. Lacinius ( talk) 22:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
from WP:NFF
"Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Similarly, films produced in the past, which were either not completed or not distributed, should not have their own articles unless their failure was notable per the guidelines." ..both of these apply at this point and come up as FAIL - Tracer9999 ( talk) 22:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC) reply
First question asked, "I see no indication that the "unavailable" Crystalsky.com began a redesign "about a month ago". Do you have some connection to Crystal Sky?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "I mentioned Crystal Sky is currently unavailable and why, just as a courtesy in case someone tried to visit the site and the page would not load." This relates directly back to practically the first thing I said in this discussion, "Also added original plot synopsis back into article which came from the film production company Crystal Sky's own website. Crystalsky.com is currently unavailable because the site is undergoing a redesign, which began about a month ago." Which established in this discussion that I have visited the site, so I don't think it is too much of a stretch to think that someone might visit a site more than one time.
Next question asked, "Id also like to point out crystalsky.com was last archived by archive.org on may 1, 2008 with nothing at all for the year 2009, which is rather strange, are they still in business?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "Crstal Sky must still be in business if another of their productions Tekken was just released in Japan at the end of last month."
Next question asked, "lastly, you seem to be dodging the question (asked twice now) of how you know the sites under construction?"
To which I replied in my very next comment, "I have visited the Crystal Sky site a number of times, and as I have already stated above it was around a month ago when I visited again, and noticed the site was unavailable and had been replaced by a holding page indicating that the site was under reconstruction, but I'm not sure when the holding page might have gone up. It was actually only a few days ago that the holding page was taken down and is now just returning the "403 Forbidden" error when visiting the site."
Quite frankly I find it rather silly to ask someone that is clearly using the Internet how they could possibly know a site is under construction. Have you never visited a site more than once over the course of several months, and have you never noticed websites going up and down and changing and being unavailable for maintenance in all your time on the Internet. Is that really such a unique experience? I also find it rather insolent of you to suggest that I have somehow refused to answer the questions that were asked of me in this discussion.
But perhaps reading comprehension is not your strong suit, and as evidence you have demonstrated that quite well in this disscussion about the original article, which began with this comment about the filmofilia.com website. This is your comment from the article history: (cur | prev) 12:45, 9 April 2010 SummerPhD (talk | contribs) (1,409 bytes) (?Plot: -copyright violation [1] and promotional language) (undo)
I then explained that they sourced their information from the crystalsky.com website by my comment, "That site "borrowed" their summary from Crystal Sky as well, and even cite Crystal Sky as the source which can be found on that page just above the poster."
You then indicated that I was still somehow wrong about that point, because it could not possibly be your inflated ego getting in the way, with this comment as typed by you above, "(Incidentally, I don't read "“Robosapien: Rebooted” is scheduled to hit theaters in 2009. [source: Crystal Sky]" as saying "We copied text verbatim from that site.")"
Okay then, please do tell how filmofilia.com was able to "devine" the exact text and provided a direct source link back to crystalsky.com, if they did not copy text verbatim from the production company website? Lacinius ( talk) 14:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC) reply