Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dissolve

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was - kept - SimonP 14:30, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Dissolve
This page is pending deletion but should NEVER get deleted what if you need help. This content should be preserved: "In film, a dissolve is a gradual transition from one image to another. In film this effect is created by controlled double exposure from frame to frame; transiting from the end of one clip to the beginning of another. In video, the effect is created by interpolating voltages of the video signal."

This is an encyclopedic (includes "how") description of a technique in cinematography. The wiktionary entry Dissolve makes no mention of this technique. Kappa 13:34, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Wiktionary, add this to the existing entry. Megan1967 08:35, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as useful and encyclopedic stub (though it should probably also be renamed to something like dissolve (cinematography), with a redirect. The last thing we want to do is start moving encyclopedic information (ie. on the technical implementation and usage of this techique) to Wiktionary. Jgm 15:11, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - David Gerard 23:30, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - Psychofox 01:24, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC) This article should be expanded to explain the process of dissolving. i.e. when you put some salt in water is apparently dissappears.  An encyclopedic entry should contain detail about the physical process, and it's characteristics, such as, as disolved solid can be recovered by evaporating away the liquid.  It should mention the distinction between disolving, melting and chemical reactions for example.  Witness the related article on evaporation for a good example.
 * You mean that this article should duplicate all of the stuff at solution, solvation, soluble, and solvent, some of which have themselves already been noted as duplicates? Uncle G 03:55, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
 * Please see what is written on the Administrators Noticeboard about this and similar articles. Uncle G 12:11, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
 * Keep or move. I have greatly expanding the article. I know a lot about digital video editing. See either dissolve or dissolve (cinematography). -- Uncle Ed (talk) 23:09, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * No, what you've done is a copy&paste move of the original article followed by an expansion. Copy&paste moves are bad.  Don't do them.  Please apply your changes to dissolve and mark dissolve (cinematography) for speedy deletion. Uncle G 03:55, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
 * If it means that much to you, do it yourself. I don't care where the article *is* - just that it continues to exist. See Be bold. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 15:29, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * They are your edits. I cannot apply them for you.  If you care about them, re-apply them to the proper article, because I've now marked dissolve (cinematography) for speedy deletion.  Uncle G 18:34, 2005 Mar 29 (UTC)
 * Keep as disambig. --Aranae 02:56, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.