Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of 1896 films

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 redirect to category, which is cheap and easy.. - Mailer Diablo 19:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of 1896 films

List of 1896 films (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Another set lists by the same someone who has mistaken Wikipedia for IMDB Lite at List of Finnish films. The beginning of a series of text dumps taken from IMDB (copyvio, not a reliable source) used to create a series of lists (better in categories) for indiscriminate information (WP:NOT#DIR), so the creator can ultimately create several thousand stubs on utterly non-notable films. In case there's any doubt about the creator'S intentions, take a look at List of 1896 films for the letter A and the letter B. Included are future text dumps from 1888 to 1910 and any potential text dumps through 2009, as the honking big template on the page seems to threaten. Calton | Talk 06:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete more categories masquerading as lists. Indiscriminate, and thus deletable. Also, a friendly-worded cease-and-desist request for this users talk page may be in order. --Jayron32 06:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment The user is working with the Films WikiProject, I believe, in good faith. Her Pegship 06:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply I agree that the edits were made in good faith. I made some comments on the users talk page to explain the position that while we appreciate the effort, these organization attempts would be better served by categories than by lists. It is a noble cause, I agree, but poorly executed in this case. We want this user to continue to do good work here, just in a way that is more in line with policy. --Jayron32 07:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. There's no indication we have articles to put in such a category, but the list clearly isn't working. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MER-C 12:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete good faith or not, we do nobody a service by keeping this in the pretence that it may one day be encyclopaedic. Guy (Help!) 14:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. We already have year-in-film categories. We don't need lists with the same information. In response to the nominator, I don't believe lists can be copyrighted so I wouldn't call it a copyvio, and I don't consider IMDb to be a completely unreliable source either. But in any event, this list (and the others proposed) are not needed. 23skidoo 17:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per others. Punkmorten 17:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Sharkface217 05:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

For God's Sake everybody. I am redirecting to categories which already have lists. However I may need to draw up lists for films betweeen 1896 and 1910 as there are practically no films in the categories. Oh yes of course a lists of films by year is really unencyclopedic. You really amaze me people. Navigation box is remaining though - useful for connecting all years in fuilms not just near years/ User:Calton is a serious knob that he wants to delete everything I do Ernst Stavro Blofeld 16:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Redirected everything to catwgories which serve as lists and also tell us what films exist on wikipedia. Case closed, Template will remain to navigate between the entire years of film histiry because at present in the categories it is by decade. Ernst Stavro Blofeld 17:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I think it would be a good idea to maintain a list of redlinked films by year and nation of origin within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Films namespace so people working on that project can use it to work from. I am just not sure such a list belongs in the Mainspace. --Jayron32 16:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

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.