- 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. WP:SNOW. ( non-admin closure) Anarchyte ( work | talk) 08:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- Voldemort: Origins of the Heir ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable. I don’t see we have a criteria for fan films; it certainly has not and will very likely never satisfy any of the criteria for commerical or artistically valuable films. Only refs are to blogs noting the release of a teaser trailer, and the "litigation" seems to be just Warners asking them to stop doing it commercially so they did. JohnBlackburne words deeds 10:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Fan films certainly can meet GNG, but this one does not seem to do so. ★Trekker ( talk) 10:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep It's a professional fan film. There has been a legal complain by Warner Brothers which ended in Warner Brothers allowing the film to be created. They got millions by crowd funding. It has been covered by many newspapers for a long period. International newspapers as well. And I am quite sure they will get more public response after the release this year. So it is notable according to WP:NOTE standards. According to WP:NFILM: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." [1]-- Rævhuld ( talk) 12:07, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Not only has this received a lot of media attention it's been recognised by Warner Brothers and JK Rowling herself. Brocicle ( talk) 10:34, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ "voldemort origins of the heir j k rowling". Google Search. 1900-03-17. Retrieved 2017-06-05.
- Keep This has been receiving a lot of media attention, plus Warner Bros has allowed it to be created. This is, so to say, an official unofficial film, in such that it isn't being produced by JKR/Warner Bros, but they have approved it. Mydabo ( talk) 16:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- @ Mydabo: "It’s the end and the beginning. The many becoming the few becoming the One." – Kaecilius, from Doctor Strange (film). —usernamekiran (talk)
- Keep as per HisDabo —usernamekiran (talk) 20:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep as per above. In addition we have a precedent: Find Makarov: Operation Kingfish is a similar fan made movie in case of call of duty ....... Sulaimandaud ( talk) 05:42, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep* as according to User:JohnBlackburne "Only refs are to blogs noting the release of a teaser trailer" when in fact the first 2 references which are used often in the article go to the official page for the production company of the fan movie. 11:43 7 June (BTS) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.60.86 ( talk) 10:44, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Refs to a production company are equally useless as blog refs. Where are the reliable sources if this is notable? ★Trekker ( talk) 11:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep* as according to User:Arkhan Daxter. If the film has received millions in crowd funding, is receiving publicity from the media and Warner Brothers' has allowed them to make the fan film, then the page deserves to stay. Although if the page is deleted I would suggest a "Fan Made HP Film Page" which would include the other 3 major fan films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkhan Daxter ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. WP:SNOW. ( non-admin closure) Anarchyte ( work | talk) 08:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- Voldemort: Origins of the Heir ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable. I don’t see we have a criteria for fan films; it certainly has not and will very likely never satisfy any of the criteria for commerical or artistically valuable films. Only refs are to blogs noting the release of a teaser trailer, and the "litigation" seems to be just Warners asking them to stop doing it commercially so they did. JohnBlackburne words deeds 10:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Fan films certainly can meet GNG, but this one does not seem to do so. ★Trekker ( talk) 10:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep It's a professional fan film. There has been a legal complain by Warner Brothers which ended in Warner Brothers allowing the film to be created. They got millions by crowd funding. It has been covered by many newspapers for a long period. International newspapers as well. And I am quite sure they will get more public response after the release this year. So it is notable according to WP:NOTE standards. According to WP:NFILM: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." [1]-- Rævhuld ( talk) 12:07, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Not only has this received a lot of media attention it's been recognised by Warner Brothers and JK Rowling herself. Brocicle ( talk) 10:34, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
References
- ^ "voldemort origins of the heir j k rowling". Google Search. 1900-03-17. Retrieved 2017-06-05.
- Keep This has been receiving a lot of media attention, plus Warner Bros has allowed it to be created. This is, so to say, an official unofficial film, in such that it isn't being produced by JKR/Warner Bros, but they have approved it. Mydabo ( talk) 16:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- @ Mydabo: "It’s the end and the beginning. The many becoming the few becoming the One." – Kaecilius, from Doctor Strange (film). —usernamekiran (talk)
- Keep as per HisDabo —usernamekiran (talk) 20:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep as per above. In addition we have a precedent: Find Makarov: Operation Kingfish is a similar fan made movie in case of call of duty ....... Sulaimandaud ( talk) 05:42, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep* as according to User:JohnBlackburne "Only refs are to blogs noting the release of a teaser trailer" when in fact the first 2 references which are used often in the article go to the official page for the production company of the fan movie. 11:43 7 June (BTS) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.60.86 ( talk) 10:44, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Refs to a production company are equally useless as blog refs. Where are the reliable sources if this is notable? ★Trekker ( talk) 11:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep* as according to User:Arkhan Daxter. If the film has received millions in crowd funding, is receiving publicity from the media and Warner Brothers' has allowed them to make the fan film, then the page deserves to stay. Although if the page is deleted I would suggest a "Fan Made HP Film Page" which would include the other 3 major fan films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkhan Daxter ( talk • contribs) 15:53, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- 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.