Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 juni 9

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 Merge content into The Hills Have Eyes (series) and redirect. (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 00:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Hills Have Eyes documentaries

Requested by 203.143.248.114. StaticGull Talk 16:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article was subjected to a proposed deletion on 4 June. The rationale was "While the Hills Have Eyes films appear to meet Wikipedia's inclusion standards, these documentary snippets about the films do not." An IP, noted above, removed the PROD tag and indicated that it should proceed to AFD. No comment on deletion, but the PROD rationale is the only provided deletion rationale, so I thought it prudent to post it here. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 00:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. I don't have much opinion either way on this article - I don't think these documentaries are inherently notable, but the article isn't blatantly violating any policies either. It is verifiable, as they do have pages on IMDB (see this search for 'The Hills Have Eyes': [1]) - which may also be evidence of some degree of notability - but we don't generally have articles on spin-off documentaries, unless they're particularly notable in their own right (the only example I can think of is Empire of Dreams, and even that's questionable). Perhaps this is an area where a new notability guideline is needed. Terraxos (talk) 14:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Close call, but merge with The Hills Have Eyes (series). As the article is currently presented, it has the wrong name (it should be List of The Hills Have Eyes documentaries or List of documentary films about The Hills Have Eyes) as it is essentially a list article, but is a list of four entries long enough to stand on its own, especially considering the lack of information on each of the entries? Clearly, the answer must be "no"; but since these documentaries were produced alongside the films in the The Hills Have Eyes series, it seems more à propos to merge it into that article about the movies series and give it the appropriate weight there. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 22:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with The Hills Have Eyes (series) as I doubt that the article in question would be expanded enough one way or another to be a worthwhile list article; at the same time, the documentaries don't seem to have notability that is independent of the film series. Separating the entries into independent stubs would be inappropriate on many levels here. I also agree with IP's point that a merge would enable the documentaries to be given the appropriate weight relative to the Hills Have Eyes series movies. B.Wind (talk) 04:43, 20 June 2008 (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.