Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hobbit (1985 film)

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. Drmies (talk) 05:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The_Hobbit_(1985_film)

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

this film isn't notable...there are numerous films with the same name and when I search this with the year, I find about 3 youtube videos. This simply isn't notable per WP:GNG Go Phightins! (talk) 20:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't clearly understand what notable means? I wouldn't give the film 5 starts. I was myself rather surprised to find out it actually exists, I thought it's a joke, but I found famous actors played in that film and from the sources and even http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptations_of_The_Hobbit speaks about it. Also http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/The_Hobbit_(disambiguation). If article isn't properly formatted it's another thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delusionalinsanity (talk • contribs) 20:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly the film doesn't meet notability guidelines. No third party sources found, either. Tinton5 (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, man. If something exists on a tape and not on paper, does it exist? :) Here's another one http://www.kinopoisk.ru/film/468309/ hosted on a website КиноПоиск - see this link for more http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delusionalinsanity (talk • contribs) 21:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no doubt it exists, but I question it's notability. Go Phightins! (talk) 21:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ru:Гердт,_Зиновий#Фильмография

Ok, I don't mind if it's removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delusionalinsanity (talk • contribs) 21:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I went to the author's page to explain WP:N, so that might clear some things up. Also did a cleanup/format. This might be one of those things where there are refs in other languages, so I'd like to get a moment to ping the WikiProjects for Russia and for "Middle Earth" just to get some support from folks who might be able to substantiate. Given that it's apparently a Soviet film with some decently well-known institutions involved, it's likely documented somewhere. I agree it needs to show that documentation, but I'd like to get a little more time on it. Worst case, I'd like to see it sandboxed (and I'll accept it to my userpage if we lose track of the originator). MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delusional, your link has the title "Приключения хоббита" for 1985, is that what you understand the film to be? I tried gBooking that, but my Russian's not good enough (and there's a lot of snippet-view) to be able to see what's about the film (фильм) and what's about the book. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:22, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless notability can be proven. The only sources are YouTube and another Wiki. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 22:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:NFILMS. Notable, award-winning actors played in this film.--Kürbis (✔) 22:54, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The Russian Wiki page has no sources, and there are no sources in this page which prove that those award-winning actors are in it. 69.62.243.48 (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You have to look at the actor pages there, ip. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 08:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - So we should use a Wikipedia article to source another Wikipedia article? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 02:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Still not conclusive due to lack of clear sources, but there's a pretty lengthy writeup on ru.wiki: ru:Сказочное путешествие мистера Бильбо Беггинса, Хоббита. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Adaptations of The Hobbit. I'm aware that there is a language barrier here, but a search didn't bring up anything that I could use as a reliable source to back up anything in the article or show notability. If someone can provide them I'd be willing to change my vote. That said, this wouldn't be bad to redirect to the adaptations page, as redirects are cheap and we could probably sum up everything in this article in about 2 sentences at this point.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:31, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ~~Redirect to Adaptations of The Hobbit~~ ~~for now, per the language barrier, but without prejudice for return once the barrier is overcome.~~ I did find a couple Russian language sources discussing this children's film broadcast on Leningrad Televion,[1] so its existance is not in doubt. Finding coverage of Soviet-made films is difficult, andfinding such for Soviet television is even more so. If usefied to its author, he could have the time neccessary to dig even deeper. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bad idea. The reader wants to know more about this film, not the adaptions. I can add a plot section, which is not 2-sentences long as Tokyo asserted. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 08:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that's a last resort; merging into "Adaptions" pulls the film out of many category trees of interest: Soviet film, 1985 films, etc. It's not just a version of the Hobbit, it exists in other spheres. So merge would wipe out most of that utility. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Closer: I am not at all adverse to a "keep", as we do have some sources... even with the understandable difficulty in sourcing a Soviet television project confirmed as broadcast and covered in 1985. By comparison, an American television project from 1955... thirty years earlier... would be far easier. I understand that in our improving Wikipedia, we need be careful to not let an unfortunate systemic and internet bias limit our ability to inform readers of non-English, pre-internet, Soviet topics... as long as we at least have verfiability. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:56, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to keep above per WP:CSB. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It's a teleplay, i.e., the TV version of a stage production for children. You may download it from this torrent and judge for yourself. --Ghirla^-трёп- 11:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sources were added and some info was provided. We should not really expect a NewYorker article about this movie, but at least the source I provided is reliable (did not check the others).--Ymblanter (talk) 16:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure whether this source exercises editorial control, but there is some coverage here. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

not sure about the source...seems to be a little like a Russian version of IMBD--Go Phightins! (talk) 19:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gets mentions here and here. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:01, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, sourcing isn't stellar by US standards, but for a Soviet film this seems to hit an acceptable of level of sourcing. The film is about indisputably Notable, albeit hard to properly document, so I think this we're veering into a "angels dancing on the head of a pin" argument here. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Keep. Appears to be notable enough. No good reason for deletion. If this was an English-language production we'd undoubtedly keep it. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:42, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 09:43, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per above.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the long-standing and stable Russion language wiki article and the references in the English language article. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:00, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The current sources demonstrate notability. Even the Huffington Post picked up on the film last year [2]. De728631 (talk) 17:31, 30 September 2012 (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.