Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nickelodeon Original Movies

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 was keep. Coredesat 05:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nickelodeon Original Movies

Nickelodeon Original Movies (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Nickelodeon Original Movies isn't a company, just pain listcruft Caldorwards4 04:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep meets requirements of WP:LIST guideline. I see no reason to delete beyond WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which isn't really a valid, guideline-based or policy-based reason. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I understand the argument above, but the problem is they are not under the umbrella of Nickelodeon Original Movies and I've never seen the term referenced in any Nick promo, it isn't a movie series. They aren't even really movies to begin with; the descriptor 'full-length movie' is used in promos, but at best they're extended one-hour episodes. Also note in the article history that this title was redirecting to the channel article for the last five months before an IP suddenly restored it without any previous discussion in the middle of October, then Wikialexdx stretched it out to include any extended Nick show episode and theatrical film (which is under the banner of Nickelodeon Movies) since 1999, absurdely out of the original bounds. This is definitely cruft that got quickly out of control. Nate 05:38, 1 November 2007 (UT
  • Keep*I don't get it, if the movies exist, shouldn't we put them all together on one article? Or should we change the Title?--Wikialexdx 10:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per Jayron and (possibly) Wikialex. I agree with Jay that this meets the WP:LIST guidelines. Regarding the deleted article, it attempted to include every film shown on Nick, including "Ferris Bueller's Day Off", and was misleading. By contrast, these films were specifically produced for the popular Nickelodeon network. It's irrelevant that they weren't produced by the same company...they wouldn't have been made at all except for Nick. It's inaccurate to call the TV movies "extended one-hour episodes" of a series. Anyone who has sat, or been forced to sit, through such shows knows that there are no "one hour" episodes; episodes run about 6-8 minutes, while the movies are 90 minutes or more, designed to keep the short-attention span young audience to stay through the commercials. Often, the films are eagerly looked forward to, such as the "All Grown Up" update of Rugrats. Whether you like or hate Nickelodeon, there's no arguing that it's one of the most popular cable networks in the U.S. and the rest of the TV watching world. Mandsford 12:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment We're not Nick's marketing department. The NOM term is not in use on the channel. As for my use of 'one hour episode', I didn't mean in the literal sense, I meant that the plot was extended to fit an hour timeslot with commercials. I understand Nick's influence and all that, but these films are not put under a unified marketing umbrella like DCOMs and are usually just advertised on their own merits. Nate 21:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This is solid information which improves wikipedia, no reason to delete it. --MacGyver07 18:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment It's information already found within the Nick Movies article and the individual articles for each film or series, and again the article was redirecting to the channel because it was just listing three different film projects that have their own articles and weren't under a NOM banner. At best there should be a category called Category:Television films produced by Nickelodeon for this information. Nate 21:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)\
  • Comment You think that there should be a category, but not a list? You're more of an inclusionist then I am, and I'm pretty bad. A Category presupposes that a separate article should be authored about each Nickelodeon movie. I'm of the opposite view-- delete articles like "Abra-Catastrophe" (or whatever the Oddparents movie was called), and have an article about the films themselves. Mandsford 01:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep This is clearly notable, although list like, but notable. scope_creep 21:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I have to say it's totally detailed, but that's my opinion. --Wikialexdx 02:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep There has to be a main article or category linking all these films.--Cartman005 04:18, 3 November 2007 (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.