Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Angolan films
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 keep. — TKD::Talk 08:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Angolan films (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Out of all of the films listed, as few as there are, only two have articles. All the others are dead links. There is no discussion of the film industry in Angola. This is essentially an empty page, copied from Imdb and given Wiki formatting. There are not enough articles to justify making a category either. Perspicacite 22:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Extreme keep. To avoid bias, we must allow articles like this time to grow. Just because there are only two today doesn't mean there won't be more tomorrow. This is one of a large set, as can be seen by the template at the bottom of the page. Corvus cornix 22:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "Extreme Keep"? Do you honestly think your opinion is given some kind of additional gravitas by sticking a superfluous adjective on it? If so, keep dreaming. --Agamemnon2 07:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Corvus cornix. The article identifies articles that need to be written. (Not every listed film will qualify, but many more than the present two certainly will.) What we need is a few good editors who are bilingual in English and Portuguese. See Cinema em Angola in the PT Wikipedia. They're still working on the directors' bios, to say nothing of specific films, but the notability of several more films is indicated. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 23:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I have no problem with another editor taking the time to write an article. I just don't see the point of having a placeholder in the meantime. Perspicacite 23:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WP:NOEFFORT Sometimes an article is proposed for deletion that is not being worked on very much, or has not been edited by a person for a long time, and thus might not be in very good shape. This does not necessarily mean that the topic is unsuitable for Wikipedia, it may be that the topic is obscure or difficult to write about. An article should be assessed based on whether it has potential for expansion, not how frequently it has been edited to date, though such assessment should be realistic. WP:RUBBISH because the current article is poor does not necessarily mean that the subject is not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia. Instead, try to consider the article's potential for improvement. In the Wiki model, an article that is poor now can be improved and rewritten to fix its current flaws. MarkBul 02:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's an essay, not a policy or a guideline. I disagree. Perspicacite 02:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WP:NOEFFORT Sometimes an article is proposed for deletion that is not being worked on very much, or has not been edited by a person for a long time, and thus might not be in very good shape. This does not necessarily mean that the topic is unsuitable for Wikipedia, it may be that the topic is obscure or difficult to write about. An article should be assessed based on whether it has potential for expansion, not how frequently it has been edited to date, though such assessment should be realistic. WP:RUBBISH because the current article is poor does not necessarily mean that the subject is not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopaedia. Instead, try to consider the article's potential for improvement. In the Wiki model, an article that is poor now can be improved and rewritten to fix its current flaws. MarkBul 02:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Angolan Films and remove the two blue links. We don't need a list for two blue links, and we already have a category (Category:Angolan films). There is no content here other than film titles and years, and per WP:LIST, "any lists which exist primarily for development or maintenance purposes (such as a list of red link articles needed) should be in project or user space not the main space". PC78 12:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep A placeholding article lets readers and editors know that an article is needed, even with an article consisting of redlinks the article will recieve both a traffic of curious passers by and those interested in the topic, anf from that traffic someone might take an interest in creating content.KTo288 15:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 15:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 15:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - not all of these films should be articles, as a number include shorts, but here we can offer a full list of all Angolan films produced, obviously reorgarnizing the list in a way to provide a fast overview of all films produced.--Aldux 16:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep because the topic is as approprizately encyclopedic as for other countries.DGG (talk) 02:53, 11 September 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.