Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Idiot (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 Delete for now. Cbrown1023 18:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American Idiot (film)

This is an article about a film that is rumored to be in development. There is no imdb entry for this film that I can find. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a crystal ball, nor is it a place to report rumors. GabrielF 19:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep The sources confirm from Green Day that the movie is going to happen. It's not a rumour.--Jude 21:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. icelandic hur ric ane #12 _(talk) 21:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, one off-hand comment isn't quite enough. Otherwise, the only material available for this movie is speculation. hateless 21:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sources show it's going to happen. There is more than one comment from Green Day about it. Five sources on the subject. PureSoldier 22:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- IMDB is the best source when dealing with things related to film. They have a comprehensive database of movies past, present, and future. If this isn't there, chances are it's nothing more than a hope and a wish. Soltak | Talk 22:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There is another source in the Green Day article that mentions the movie, a more recent one. Sources show it's going to happen. Orfen ^{User Talk} | _Contribs 22:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The comments included are themselves contradictory. "this is definitely going to happen" and "every week there are more ideas about doing a film". Is it going to happen or isn't it? Let's know for sure before we allow an article. Wikipedia isn't a rumor mill. Soltak | Talk 22:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No evidence that this film is actually going to be launched. This is premature. Wait until there's actually pre-launch publicity about the film. At the moment, we have a one-line remark and a couple of speculative articles that prove nothing Bwithh 23:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heck, we don't even know that the proposed film is going to be called "American Idiot" Bwithh 23:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

green day authority has a "current projects" page, and I'm adding it as a source to the article. I've found one other article from billboard as well here where Mike Dirnt ( bassist ) states: "We're definitely working on a film based on the album," which I will add to the article now.--Jude 05:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The verifiable information is limited to the fact that they intend on making a film; we don't even know the title. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 23:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Also note that IMDB is not a reliable source, as they accept information from virtually anyone. -- Kesh 02:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and a Comment Talk of a movie isn't enough, there isnt enough verifiable info to stand alone. Also: IMDB isn't a blog, the information comes from the studios. You can add comments and trivia, but not edit or add entries to their database. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Kesh. As a rule of thumb movies should almost never have articles if they have not moved past D-hell, and even after that, rarely. --Dhartung | Talk 03:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Kesh. ImDb is not a reliable source -- it's Web 2.0 (i.e. user-authored like Wikipedia), with no fact-checking, so it's just as unreliable as Wikipedia (Note: Ironically, Wikipedia itself would fail as a source under its own WP:RS rules). Morton Devonshire^Yo 19:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that isn't true. The process of getting a film added to IMDB is akin to anesthhesia free dentistry. Submissions ARE reviewed and often rejected. It is nowhere near as easy as Wikipedia. Not even close. I still think the article should be deleted, but for different reasons as stated below.nut-meg 07:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Green Day confirmed it. Remember, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, so it's not like there's no room for it. Mcr616 22:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green Day confirming it means nothing until there is ink on paper. The deletion process has nothing to do with space. It's a quality control thing.nut-meg 07:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per Kesh. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per Kesh. WereWolf 01:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per PureSoldier. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This film is neither scheduled or expected. I searched for it through Lexis Nexis and found nothing other than there was an "idea". Billy Joe Armstrong said it was "definitely going to happen", but unless he's going to fund it himself, no deal has been inked. In Hollywood, rumors of a film do not a film make. It sounds like no script has been written either. To me, do deal in place no script written = delete. Put it on the Green Day page if you have good citations. But it does not yet warrant its own page.nut-meg 07:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this does get deleted, which it looks like it will. I agree with Nut-meg and Richard about the merge. It's rather important in the Green Day fandom, so people will notice that it's missing.--Jude 18:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not green-lit. As other users said above anything could happen but nothing can be confirmed so it turns into crystal-balling. Eluchil404 10:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Until it's under production or at least green lit, it's still just rumor and speculation, and qualify as WP:CRYSTAL -- The Bethling ^(Talk) 16:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 17:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and/or merge per nut-meg. Em-jay-es 03:38, 27 January 2007 (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.