Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shin Ultraman

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. SpinningSpark 19:03, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shin Ultraman

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable future film, no evidence main production has begun, does not meet WP:NFF BOVINEBOY2008 23:08, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject has plenty of coverage in news sources: https://www.cbr.com/shin-godzilla-ultraman-name-connection/ http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ202002020009.html https://comicbook.com/anime/news/shin-ultraman-new-design-first-look/ https://www.slashfilm.com/shin-ultraman-movie-hideaki-anno/ https://screenrant.com/shin-ultraman-movie-release-date-2021/ https://variety.com/2019/film/asia/shin-ultraman-japan-hideaki-anno-and-shinji-higuchi-1203287912/ Passenger pigeon (talk) 02:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, this film in particular isn't notable enough to have an article about it yet, at least not until the film will have been premiered. Also, the article lacks independent sources, but those can be found on Google. Sam1529 (talk) 05:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There may be more coverage in the future, but so far nothing substantive enough to make an article. Therefore, I concur with the policy-based argument made by Bovineboy2008. Handy History Handbook (talk) 20:05, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems to be adequately sourced. WP:FILM doesn’t supersede WP:GNG.—Prisencolin (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It is standard to not have article for films which have not yet begun filming, all the coverage is routine for planed films of a well known studio/franchise, nothing here indicates that the project could not be covered in the franchise article in a very small section.★Trekker (talk) 02:33, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I’m gonna have to agree with Trekker over here. This type of pre-filming coverage is routine, therefore it doesn’t satisfy GNG. Bait30 ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 06:11, 23 June 2020 (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.