Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dollar Cinema (Montreal, Quebec)


 * 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Dollar Cinema (Montreal, Quebec)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article is an advertisement, a glorified business listing if you will. There is absolutely nothing unique about this business operation to merit an article. Not pricing, not films shown, not the owner, and not theater itself. For the latter, it is a movie theater built in the late 70's with no special architecture or design traits. Nothing historic happened here either, it was just a general run-of-the-mill shopping center cinema for 20 years that closed and later reopened as a cheap second-run theater. I feel it is no different from having an article on the convenience store around the corner from me. Apple2gs (talk) 01:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 02:36, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:28, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * There are at least three of these within 30 minutes of me, and this one doesn't appear to be at all different. Delete, per the nominators reasoning.  Nolelover   Talk · Contribs  06:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wow talk about cheap! But yeah, that doesn't make it notable enough for an article.  Phnom Pencil  talk contribs 13:59, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Incidentally it's no longer $1/ticket, it's gone up to $2.85. The dollar-store concept applied to movie ticket admission was the only unique thing about it, but with that long gone, there is nothing remotely article worthy about it now (not that there really was to begin with; in retrospect, I should have never created the article in the first place). --Apple2gs (talk) 02:23, 28 November 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.