Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Latinos in 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 no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 03:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latinos in film[edit]

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

While the article has potential, this is currently an original research, unvertifable mess Delete Secret ^account 03:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Jujutacular ^talk 05:00, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. -- Jujutacular ^talk 05:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Socorro! Not beyond rescuing, as there are plenty of reliable and verifiable published sources out there [1]. This article is trying to cover two topics at the same time. The portrayal of Hispanic or Latinos by Hollywood is one (or in many cases, lack of portrayal-- on television, Southern California seems to be populated solely by blonde-haired white Anglo-Saxon dudes); the experience of Latino actors and those trying to become directors and producers is another. I can't say delete, because both topics are encyclopedic, but I can't say keep, because neither topic seems to be covered in an encyclopedic manner. Mandsford 19:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete regardless of whether the topic is notable, this essay would need to be pared back to what can be sourced to reliable sources and probably best to start from scratch. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can start from scratch without deletion. We just need to pare back the existing content in a big way. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since the topic is notable, as Mandsford shows in the link to search engine results. This is an entire book about the very topic, demonstrating the strong likelihood of significant coverage. The article being a mess is not an excuse to delete, but we can perform clean-up by reducing the article to a stub with a basic summary and provide references for future expansion. Erik (talk | contribs) 14:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even the nominator thinks it has potential, so the appropriate thing to do is improve it. DGG ( talk ) 06:20, 20 September 2010 (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.