Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analysis of Tom Cruise's 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   delete. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Analysis of Tom Cruise's films

 * – ( View AfD View log )

OR and possibly SYNTH. 'delete - UtherSRG (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC) UtherSRG (talk) 03:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. We have articles on every movie mentioned in the article. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:04, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SYNTH, at least at the moment. I would recommend the author look at TVTropes. Kyle Barbour 04:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Tom Cruise. Doesn't seem like original research and original synthesis if you look at the sources. Most of the info is paraphrased from Roger Ebert's work, so we can't pass it off as nonsense. - Yk3 talk · contrib 04:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Certainly some of the information is salvageable. This is a good idea if limited to only fully citable claims and not broader statements about the existence of this theory. Kyle Barbour 04:15, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:SYNTH. Moray An Par (talk) 05:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - original essay. Carrite (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure original research and synthesis. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge. I believe information should be merged rather than deleted; in order to retain some of the salvageable bits of wisdom found in this article. GVnayR (talk) 14:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The article is a very close paraphrase of this source it cites, so I can't agree OR is quite the issue here. A larger issue in my mind is copyright violation concerns, as the paraphrasing of the source is minor; most of the text appears byte-for-byte identically in both, with this article moving some information around, rewording some sentences, and cutting large amounts of text.  While the tone of the article is that of an essay, rather than an encyclopedia article, it is for copyright reasons that we must delete.  Cheers, everyone.  lifebaka++ 17:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete In addition to copyright issues, it's based on only a single review of Ebert's, so not worth merging to Tom Cruise. There is already mention there that should be edited as it suggests this is a widely held idea. Jeffwimbush (talk) 00:53, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per Lifebaka and Jeffwimbush. Among the other problems with this article is that it is about 20 years out of date; while the analysis described in the article can be applied to a few of Cruise's films, it would be difficult to apply it to, say, Eyes Wide Shut or Collateral. While changing the title to Analysis of a few of Tom Cruise's films would make it more accurate, it would also illustrate why the subject is not really meant to be the topic of an encyclopedia article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:08, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, appears to be mostly random musings violating SYNTH and OR. -- Cirt (talk) 00:20, 19 May 2011 (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.