Deletion of Ecstasy (2008 film)

Comment: per the |notability guidelines for future films.  This is keeping in the spirit of WP:CRYSTAL, which permits verifiable coverage but also meets the threshold of  since a project that has not begun filming is not guaranteed to actually do so and have a full-fledged article in time.  No prejudice against recreation if the article can verifiably show that filming has begun
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NFF)

Comment: It hasn't been nominated under ; it's been nominated under the |notability guideline for future films, which stipulates that a stand-alone article for a film should not be created until a project enters production. This is for very good, practical reasons. Many factors such as budget issues, scripting issues, and casting issues can interfere with a project well ahead of its intended filming date. We've seen many projects fall by the wayside at the last minute, and this has been accepted as the best way of ensuring that this place doesn't get clogged with stubby articles about films which were never made and thus would ultimately fail the |general notability guideline. It should not be assumed that because a film is likely to be a significant release that it will be immune to the usual pitfalls which can affect these productions, especially in the current climate. Look at how many productions were postponed, even shelved indefinitely, because of the 2007-2008 Writers Guild of America strike. As I mentioned above, these include the high profile ''Justice League (film)|Justice League'' film, ''Pinkville'',  and ''Shantaram (film)|Shantaram'' among many others. See also ''Jurassic Park IV'', which many would consider a no-brainer for a speedy greenlight, and was actually supposed to be ''released'' in 2005. We don't even have a separate article for the upcoming ''The Hobbit (film)|Hobbit'' film yet (note that production of that has been pushed back another year too). The ''Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film)|Fahrenheit 451'' and ''Logan's Run (2010 film)|Logan's Run'' remakes are another couple of examples of films seemingly in development hell|perpetual development. In accordance with the guideline, the article can be recreated without prejudice when principal photography is finally confirmed to have begun. Until then, there is no reason for the article to exist. I know it must be galling for someone who has put so much work into an article, but there's nothing to stop copying over any useful content to the article on the  source material, or |creating it in your userspace until production begins (if indeed it ever does). All the best
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:NFF||WP:N||WP:USERFY)