Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Movies Made So The Stars Could Do It
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 of the debate was Delete. (aeropagitica) 12:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't an article, it's a rambling opinion piece about what the writer considers bad movies. Not a scintilla of a shred of a hint of sources. Complete with a section of what his standards are, so other editors will know before ading titles to the end. Calton | Talk 14:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Edited to adjust the standards segment and added imdb as a source for verifying material.
- Delete Not a suitable encyclopedia topic. Opinion/original research. Unverifiable. Edgar181 15:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A link to the main page of IMDb does not prove Jurassic Park was made just so Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum could have sex. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 16:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete textbook original research. Just some random guy's opinions masquerading as an encyclopedia article. --W.marsh 16:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete does not even rise to the level of BJAODN. Garden-variety OR Just zis Guy you know? 17:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. It just displays the author's point of view. The directors of the movies would most likely disagree in most cases. --N-true 17:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; blatant POV and original research. --Kinu t/c 19:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete; interesting idea but without citations not a recognized genre. ProhibitOnions 21:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above --Khoikhoi 08:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Any attempt to explain why a particular movie was made is just an exercise in POV, or original research, or both. --Elkman - (talk) 00:56, 14 March 2006 (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.