Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cult classic


 * 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 but stubbify. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Cult classic

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - similar to the deleted list of cult films as well as the deleted categories for cult films and cult television shows. This is a solid mass of POV-laden original research. Otto4711 16:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Let's see here...first of all, this could be impossible to maintain as time goes by, who defines the movie as "cult classic"? Sure there is general concensus on certain movies being a "cult classic" but what would be the criteria for inclusion?  This fails WP:OR and WP:NOT horribly.  -- s u m n j i m  talk with me·changes 16:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete This article does reek of OR, but it could be completely retooled from scratch, with a strict inclusion criterion. For example, if each item were cited as being referred to as a "cult classic" in a reliable source, then it could be included.  Perhaps.  But as it stands, and will stand without massive rewriting, the article is deletable, unencyclopedic listcruft. But, on the other hand, if one were to just go through, and delete all of the items, and include a small handful that had multiple sources, what would that look like? -Seidenstud 16:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete then Redirect to a hopefully well-constructed article on Cult fiction which as I have already suggested, should be cleaned up. However, this term is just a descriptor, and I don't see that it's enough of a different concept to warrant its own article.  FrozenPurpleCube 00:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - the term deserves to be kept for definition, even if the list does not. Ibanix 05:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Dictionary definitions do not belong on WIkipedia, as Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Otto4711 04:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Is something having cult status hard to define? Yes. Does that mean we shouldn't have an article on it? No. Tag it with source requests where appropriate and move on. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: But ditch the list of cult classics. There is no way that that list can every be verified.  However, the phenomenon is real, and a very encyclopedic idea, and should be kept. - Running  On  Brains  23:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: maybe making a category for cult classics or cult films, cult books and so on (since there also is a category for cult science fiction films) might help to get rid of this list. --Tinctorius 11:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep ditto what Brains said. The list is a pov nightmare that must be removed, but the article itself seems pretty reasonable from a npov standpoint, something to build on at least. --Bongwarrior 02:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Casts its net too wide and so sprawls across too many unrelated genres. This also makes it overlap with good articles on more specifc genres like Cult TV.  Colonel Warden 21:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete seems like a list of loosely related topics. If the list is deleted, what is left apart from slightly more than a dictionary definition. Crazysuit 01:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, massive unsourced POV, I can't even tell what this article is about. Axem Titanium 03:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Per brains and tinctorius; the notion of a "cult classic" is sufficiently complex a subject that a good encyclopedia article could certainly be written about it, but the list-content needs to go. - Orphic 19:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, per above. Keep article, get rid of list. PoeticXcontribs 23:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * keep as above - a "cult classic" is a social phenomenon, and this article can be more than a dictionary definition. This is a topic worthy of keeping - but definitely the ton of listcruft must be deleted from the article. Keeping as a spot to "branch-out" is nice too. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 04:56, 6 May 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.