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. Tone 23:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ecumensus Project

[edit]

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

No evidence of notability BOVINEBOY2008 17:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 07:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails WP:NF —Mike Allen 08:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON... waaaay too soon. The film might gain coverage after its release, but it has none now and so fails WP:NFF. Okay with userfying back to author, with instruction that they carefully study WP:NF, WP:BOOK and WP:PEOPLE. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:37, 11 October 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, Rcsprinter (Gimme a message) 10:40, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cannot presume future notability as per WP:CRYSTAL. LibStar (talk) 14:26, 15 October 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.