Talk:Hollywood East

Wildly unbalanced
This entire article reads like a marketing pitch for film in New England. It's ridiculous. Nearly every source is a business or industry association website; few are impartial media outlets. Some editors have only edited this page, and added promotional content for individual businesses or the entire region/film industry, including (among many others) User:Boin777, User:Jstiles05, User:Redlion333, IP user 2601:6:3D80:545:284C:C7EF:7CC3:4AA1, User:Aidan1919, and quite a few others.

I'm not even convinced that the New England film industry is notable enough to warrant an entire article. Film production has increased, with a particular boom around 2008-2010 largely due to tax incentives, but there isn't some single phenomenon or agglomeration which has been commonly credited, as far as I know. The attempt to build Hollywood East in Orlando was more notable, given the construction of the massive Universal Studios Florida and Disney/MGM. Their failure to become successful "real working studios", however, already largely discussed on the pages of those subjects. This article, at this point, is almost exclusively marketing for a set of studios (especially Plymouth Rock Studios), film schools, and industry associations based around the New England film industry.

To start, the entire "Resources for New England Actors" and "Resources for Filmmakers in New England" should be cut. That content definitely fits within WP:NOT. A few notable institutions might belong, but by and large, the current article is not encyclopedic. It is promotional.

A more substantial section on the original Hollywood East, Orlando, could be warranted (if either use of the term is notable at all).

When I have time, I hope to carve this article up. But for now, be aware that this article is unacceptable in its current form, and it appears to have been like this since its creation. Jbbdude (talk) 20:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I just did a ton of editing. It remains imperfect. I mostly cut and restructured the article. More work remains on all of the above-outlined issues. Jbbdude (talk) 21:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree that the article read (and still reads) like marketing copy for New England film subsidies. Orlando and Florida definitely deserve a significant historical section in the article, although today Florida is not considered a major film production center. Of major film productions in 2013, 0 were produced in Florida, while 15 were produced in California and 9 were produced in New England (5 in Massachusetts and 4 in Connecticut). A striking total of 18 were produced in Louisiana. All that's to say that the New England focus is not unwarranted. It just requires major copyediting. --TimothyDexter (talk) 22:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC)