Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunmen's Blues

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. It may be a good idea to go ahead and have that merge discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gunmen's Blues

[edit]
Gunmen's Blues (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear notable. Google search Darkness Shines (talk) 00:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets WP:NF by being Eric Red's very first film,[1][2] made while he was a student at the AFI Conservatory. He went broke in trying to get it national distribution, and had to drive a cab in New York for a year to recoup.[3] And to Don4of4, the film is not quite lost. As the article states, the short is viewable (and downloadable) at Google videos Just watched it. Interesting that the film's IMDB page does not list Matt Dillon in the cast, but this is because Dillion is definitely NOT in the film. Back in 1981, a far younger Konrad Sheehan[4] did bear a slight resemblance to Dillon,[5] and this may have initiated the rumour of Dillion's being in it on the various Dillon fan sites which then spilled over into user editable databases. But IMDB does have it correct, and I have removed that error from the article when adding a couple sources. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per policy WP:NFF this point is partially mute. "films produced in the past which were ... not distributed, should not have their own articles unless their failure was notable per the guidelines." My vote stands. Don4of4 [Talk] 23:25, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • A more applicable portion of that subsection of NF states unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. Sourcable as the very first film of a notable director makes it's production worthy of note. And in toward ...not completed or not distributed, should not have their own articles unless their failure was notable per the guidelines., we still can look to it being sourcable as the very first film of a notable director as making it it worthy of note. As the topic has independent coverage as the notable director's first-ever film, we have a meeting of WP:NF, WP:GNG, and WP:NRVE. Yes, it was produced in the past and failed distribtion then. So what? It has a distributor now, and they must hate that it's available to any who clicks this link Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:18, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • While the work should be mentioned in the directors article, I fell it is not notable enough to earn it's own article. Considering the director, Eric Red has a rather short article (<15 lines) I think this should be merged with his main page. Don4of4 [Talk] 01:43, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 01:37, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think it should be mentioned this article has been up since June 2, 2006 with no problem until now. While neither of them are as well known as, say, John Carpenter, this short does involve two notable genre people - Darwin Joston and Eric Red, whose first film this was. As stated above, it does now have a distributor. And as it would not be appropriate to merge all the text from this film page into Eric Red's page, it should stand on its own. Gothicfilm (talk) 22:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. That the article has existed since 2006 has no bearing. Look, it was somebody's first film. That could matter if the person is very notable. Eric Red isn't. His article lede states that he's best known for writing the horror films The Hitcher and Near Dark. These are a couple of B movies. Near Dark "did poorly at the box office"; I don't know how The Hitcher did but it gets 59% at Rotten Tomatoes. This is not Alfred Hitchcock or Frank Capra we're talking about here. It's not even a feature film, it's a short. It's some guy's film-school student project. So was Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB. And when Red reaches Lucas's level of notability, we can revisit the issue. Herostratus (talk) 06:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a database of school/college projects. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:56, 4 September 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gunmen%27s_Blues&oldid=1080172566"