Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural references in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971 film)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Cultural references in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is nothing encyclopaedic about this article (which was previously declined a couple times). The creator just took quotes from the film and found the historical/literary source for those quotes. As far as I can tell, this makes it entirely original research, with almost no actual significant coverage of the film or its literary ties. Primefac (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - I totally missed this, even when explicitly asked about it, but now that it's spelled out in detail it seems obvious. I loath to delete something someone has put so much work into, but Prime is right, it's almost entirely original research. I added some of the quotes to the Wikiquote page, but most of them are direct quotes from other sources, aren't original enough a presentation in the movie to be added to the Wonka quote page, and would need to go on the quote page for the original work if added at all. Most of them appear to be famous enough in their own right to have already been added. For example, Mohn Masefield, Ogden Nash, Arthur O'Shaughnessy... it's all already there.  G M G  talk   20:03, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - I spoke with the primary author of this article about this previously, and they've clearly ignored my advice that sources need to be provided that refer to the occurrence of the cultural reference in the film. Simply writing a thinly-veiled essay about things that the film may have borrowed from popular culture is insufficient. DonIago (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I consider it appropriate and defensible. The work itself is a suitable source. The assemblage of facts without adding interpretations is not OR. Anyway, are we sure they do not appear in the book about hte film? Way back, during the trivia wars of 07-09, I usually supported this material. A key part of the study of films and literature is tracing cultural referents. People here did not understand this then,but perhaps they will now.    DGG ( talk ) 20:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I typed this on my talk, but I'd probably be better off posting it here. I did find this, which isn't exactly scholarly work, but it's something. But... most everything else seems to be things like this this, or this, which isn't really the kind of thing to build an article with. Some, but not all of it seems to be taken from Stuart's book starting on page 115, but that only accounts for about a half dozen of them.  G M G  talk   20:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I think WP:IPCV, and more specifically the RfC referenced in the footnote, makes it clear that the prevailing feeling at least in 2015 was that if we're going to talk about what pop culture items are significant to a work, we should use third-party sourcing to make that determination. Or as I like to put it, "the question isn't whether the tree fell in the woods, but whether it made a sound when it fell". DonIago (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge with Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. This topic sounds too specific for a standalone article. Vorbee (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete a far to specific topic to cover in an encyclopedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:13, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge. I agree with DGG that is a valid topic for an encyclopedia. The point of this project is to inform readers and that includes those who might not understand references in a 30 year old film because 30 years have passed since then. I give you that we might not need the full quotes on everything but still, at least a "cultural references" section in the main article is warranted, so at least merge it there. Regards  So Why  08:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Aside from the already brought up concerns of OR and trivia, there's also the fact that there is a fair amount of WP:SYNTH going on here. None of the sources here talk about the idea of the "Cultural References" of the film as a whole, and why the concept is notable.  Instead, its a collection of sources about each, individual quote, that has been cobbled together to create an overarching concept of the author's own creation.  64.183.45.226 (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2018 (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.