Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Actors and actresses considered the greatest ever


 * 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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:54, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Actors and actresses considered the greatest ever

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A short discussion at Talk:Actors and actresses considered the greatest ever after a request for wider attention ended up with 4 editors including myself seeing it fit for deletion, with another saying "if you delete this article then you'll have to delete the article 'films considered the greatest ever'." However Films considered the greatest ever and Television series considered the greatest ever have been proposed for deletion before, the former twice, and those are the only reasons I'm posting this here instead of slapping prod on it. It is seen as weasely and "only miscellaneous opinion from various sources", and therefore not encyclopedic. -- Reaper  X  03:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Total WP:NPOV violation. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 03:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Neutrality would seem to be an issue, but it is actually sourced information. Delete per WP:OR and WP:NPOV. This article is opinionated (seriously, Cameron Diaz?) J- ſtan TalkContribs 03:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment now what the heck are you talking about, there's no original research on that page, they're all cited. And the only time it violates WP:NOV is when people complain about what actors and actresses are on the list, like when they write things like "(seriously, Cameron Diaz)". That vote shouldn't count--AKR619 00:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Now who the heck made you decider of what "votes" count or not? Please remember that this isn't a vote, it's an attempt to establish concensus. I think that what people mean by it violating WP:NPOV is that you just can't claim something to be "the best". You can claim it recognized by certain award and whatever person, but you can't claim it's the best.-- Slarti ( 19  92 ) 01:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Frank Welker?! Shows the total lack of clearcut criteria. Weak keep IF cleaned up. Many of these selections are not for best actor, but for box office receipts. And where the heck are Laurence Olivier and Alec Guinness? Clarityfiend 04:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Jim Carrey?! The difference between this article and the other two mentioned is obvious. humblefool&reg; 04:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment now those kinds of vote shouldn't count, you don't see me nominating films considered the greatest ever because there are movies which I didn't like on it.--AKR619 08:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment please remember this isn't a "vote", this is an attempt to develop consensus. -- Reaper  X  14:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This article is more N.P.O.V then the other two articles.--AKR619 04:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment do you mean more NPOV? Because you're basically saying it's less neutral than the other two articles, therefore making it a strong reason to delete. -- Reaper  X  04:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment yes, sorry --AKR619 04:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There is nothing encyclopedic about a "greatest ever" in the arts or media. It is too subjective a topic, even when using awards, monies grossed, etc. LonelyBeacon 04:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per all the above. When you have something like "highest grossing actor" it really doesn't mean they're the greatest. Plus, no offense to Frank Welker, it's kind of dumb having him on when he's technically not an actor. --Plasma Twa 2 04:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment well why didn't you just bring it up on the discussion page rather then nominating it for and voting for it to be deleted.--AKR619 08:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inherently POV just by its premise. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Man It&#39;s So Loud In Here 05:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment now that kind of votes shouldn't count--AKR619 08:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)--AKR619 08:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Fuck you, who put you in charge? sorry, self-diagnosed manic depressive here. Man It&#39;s So Loud In Here 18:58, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Be civil. -- Reaper  X  20:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - the subject matter itself is something so incredibly subjective. Though it may be hard to deny that some actors or actresses are good, there is no reason for a list of what a group of independent sources cite as the "greatest actors ever". The result of the discussion of a similar article about songs considered the "greatest ever" was that each portion about the song could be put into that song's article. Here, each poll or decision leading to this actor/acress being voted/picked as the "greatest ever" can be put into that article. If they're the greatest ever, wouldn't people be searching for them more than less well-known actors/actresses?  Zchris87v  05:58, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Frank Welker is on the list, but Marlon Brando isn't. Crazysuit 06:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * CommentIf your going to contribute to this, you should put more then that. Makes it seem like your just saying delete cause your favorite actor isn't on the list. --Plasma Twa 2 06:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment now that kind of vote shouldn't count either, you don't see me nominating films considered the greatest ever just because my entries, like Shrek and ALaddin, aren't put in.--AKR619 08:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, well sourced and adheres to WP:NPOV AnObviousSockpuppet 07:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Considered the greatest ever is a much too indisciminate criteria, since the sources for such consideration are not defined. We could, for example, end up with non-notable people ending up in there because they've been considered "the greatest ever" by a college magazine.  An article such as Actors/Actresses who have been cosidered the greatest ever in notable polls carried out by notable organisations would be acceptable (albeit with a bit of an unweildy title), or alternatively Actors/Actresses who have won major awards would also do (provided that "major awards" was properly defined in the article)but this article is just to vague and subject to POV. A1octopus 11:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete seems very weasely in places i.e. 'sizeable populace of people'. Results of polls and statistics arent a good basis for a wikipedia article. The poll results included is currently very subjective and only covers North America. Leading a poll cannot be considered a reliable source to be included under the banner 'considered the greatest ever' because there is no guarantee that those polls were conducted reliably and represent a fair cross section of people as they were not conducted by professional research institutions. Stating that an actor who has won the most MTV Movie Awards belongs in this article is pure POV. --Neon white 13:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I think Neon White put it best. Even if the sourcing is good, and it is uses some self-defined criteria, every country on Earth wuold have to be included with their personal opinion.  The article as written, is biased to the North American  film industry.  Trying to write this without bias would involve an unbelievably long and complicated article that would still be as subjective as it is now towards selecting films for inclusion. LonelyBeacon 14:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment well now on the page, I put up poll results from Asia and the UK, I'll put up polls from other coutnries and continents as soon as I find them. --AKR619 05:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I think you missed the point. Polls cannot be considered a source for the claim 'greatest' (which is a subjective term and therefore not a NPOV). They only show the most popular. The most popular is not equivalent to the greatest. Unless you can cite an article that says the artists in question are considered the greatest than the page has no reliable citations. --Neon white 18:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, because there should be plenty of "greatest actors and actresses" list available to expand references, although perhaps could be divided up more into stuff like Greatest actors of modern times, Greates comedy actors, etc. for which sources clearly exist (please check the reference external links section of the article a few moments after I post here as I am going to add sources in a moment). Best, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 19:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A list that will grow out of control and what will be considered a proper source for these statements. Considering the current pop culture fad of making list this could grow out of control.  Ridernyc 19:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment when the pages of both films and television considered the greatest ever started they went out of control, but there were users (including myself for the latter) who kept them both in control, keeping a closeful eye on the pages. I promise I will do the esact same thing and make sure that this page doesn't get out of control. To be honest I'm surprised it hasn't already --AKR619 05:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, these lists never seem very conclusive and seem to end up just being places for people to add their favourite things using poor references. The rules for inclusion often seem to be invented by the page creator, which is surely POV. Bob talk 09:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Obviously out of place on Wikipedia. And I like Jim Carrey's work. — dorf⁠, was: aldebaer 10:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Some lists are inherently unmanageable, and this is one. DGG (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. While the entry criteria sound robust, on closer inspection they become very loose. These sorts of phone-in polls are subject to organised vote stacking, and critics' opinion is inherently subjective. In the end the list just amounts to an arbitrary list of popular actors. Sam Blacketer 11:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Upon further reflection, while I still think this article, as is, needs to be deleted, I wonder if there is not some alternative. A1octopus put forward an idea: perhaps if a tightly defined group of reputable publications were put forward, the list could be re-titled more appropriately to something like "Actors/Actresses who have won polls". This could be made even better if a very conserted effort were made to make sure to not only include media from outside the U.S, but from outside Europe as well.  I think one of the big hangups (it is with me) is the title.  If we call it what it is, I think it could be an interesting list for pop culture researchers. Doing so might also take care of the issue of this list never being conclusive.  Bob also brings up that the criteria that limit inclusion become a POV issue.  Perhaps this too can be hacked out over time.  Perhaps if interested parties began coming up with a new title and ways to have some objective limitations on what is included, there could be hope.  Otherwise, I think it needs to go. LonelyBeacon 12:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Subjective on its face and amateurish. Surprising it lasted this long. Inthegloryofthelilies 15:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Violates WP:NPOV (greatest actors and actresses ever according to who?). -- Slarti ( 19  92 ) 21:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment so does Films Considered the Greatest Ever, but I don't hear you complaining. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by AKR619 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Films that have been considered the greatest ever has already been taken to AfD. The discussion resulted in a clear consensus to keep. So editors must of seen it as more neutral than this one somehow. -- Reaper  X  06:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I would have "complained" had I known about it. Besides, that's starting to sound like WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS (not exactly but along the same area). -- Slarti ( 19  92 ) 16:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think there are deficiencies with this page; it certainly is not comprehensive, and some of the references are not on point, but it can improve and will improve over time.  I've participated maintaining Films considered the greatest ever for a few years, and it started out in much worse shape than this page.  It is possible to create a comprehensive list of actors and actresses that have been cited as being the best.  A wiki is possibly the best forum to create such a list.  If we throw away lists like these before they have matured, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.  The best thing to do with this page in its current form is to post warnings of its shortcomings and incompleteness, thereby encouraging more user input. --  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam (talk • contribs) 10:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not signing, it was not intentional. -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman 08:57, 9 October 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.