Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hero (1986 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, largely on the basis of this coverage. Feel free to move it to a more accurate title (or even merge it into 1986 FIFA World Cup given its short length). пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 13:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hero (1986 film)[edit]

This is the official film of the 1986 FIFA World Cup in Mexico, and it's narrated by Michael Caine. That's pretty much all the information I can find about it. The text of the article consists of a gushingly adoring review of the film (which I couldn't find to be a copyvio, although I did just undo an edit that was copy-pasted from an Amazon review). IMDB says it was released in West Germany, but doesn't specify what that release entailed; Amazon.co.uk does indicate that this was released as a VHS at some point, somewhere. FIFAFilms.com lists it as part of the FIFA World Cup™ Film Collection ("available for professional business users") and says it's "award-winning" but doesn't say what award it won. My best impression is that it's an essentially promotional release, although perhaps a very well-done one. If others are able to find justification to keep the article/topic, it does seem that it should at least be moved to Hero (1987 film). Propaniac (talk) 14:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This page http://www.filmplan.com/index_files/hero.htm says it did very well in Argentina. If true, it is more than just a promotional release and is enough to keep the Wiki entry. The tone of the article does need toning down a bit though. Alberon (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In light of the information on that page (which I hadn't seen before) and of course assuming it's true, I think the movie probably does qualify after all. I'm just not sure if that page or its transcription of those articles are acceptable sources. My original impulse was to delete everything from this article except for the opening sentence and rewrite it with what info could be verified, but my inability to find virtually any such information was what led me to the AFD. I'm willing to withdraw the nomination if others think that page (or any other that can be found) is enough to establish notability. Propaniac (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it is a documentary that was narrated by one of the greats, Michael Caine, and would be fine under that angle.Londo 06 15:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have a very hard time believing that anyone would consider this "a major part of [Caine]'s career", per Wikipedia:Notability (films). People narrate lots of things. This isn't even mentioned in his filmography on Wikipedia.Propaniac (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Giant Snowman 16:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per this, the film is listed as part of the official FIFA World Cup Film Collection. The article definitely needs major cleanup as well as removal of editorializing and possible copyright infringement posed by the mp3 file. I will get started on it ASAP. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've done some general cleanup, removed editorializing, referenced some claims made and added an infobox and an image of the DVD/VHS cover. If the article is kept, I fully agree with the nominator that it should be moved to Hero (1987 film) beacuse it was released in 1987. Note, the move should not be performed until the debate is closed. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually the newspaper articles on the linked filmplan.com page clearly show that it was released (in Argentina at least) in December 1986, so I would say "(1986 film)" is accurate....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I just don't know how reliable filmplan.com is as a source. It states that it's self-published by Tony Maylam who wrote and directed the film and the articles themselves aren't even scanned, they seem to be typed specifically for the purpose of being used on the website. How do we guarantee the accuracy of that text? I tried Googling all of those articles within their respective publications' websites or on any other webiste for that matter (even though they were initially published over 20 years ago, I was still hoping for some sort of archive) but came up with nothing. I would absolutely love to be able to use the filmplan page to expand the article a bit more but I don't think it passes WP:RS. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Film satisfies notability for the FIFA connection and its recognition by FIFA. Having Michael Caine involved doesn't hurt, either. All other considerations are content-related, not viability-related. 23skidoo (talk) 03:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- When I see "official film of FIFA," I think "promotional film made by FIFA." If there's reason to think that "official film" means something else, or that a promotional film made by a notable organization would automatically be notable, I would like it to be explained, because I'm having trouble understanding votes to keep on the grounds of it being an official FIFA film. For what it's worth, I don't know if any of the other films in the official FIFA World Cup Film Collection have articles, because the website that lists them doesn't include titles for any of them except this one (I doubt they do have articles, though, because I'd think there would probably be a category for them). Propaniac (talk) 14:13, 13 July 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.