Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drakula (1920 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   merge to Dracula in popular culture. Consensus is that although there are documented rumors and speculations about the existence of this film, there is not enough material to sustain an article.  Sandstein  19:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Drakula (1920 film)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article is about a supposed film that may very likely not exist. It only has a single source, which is not a reliable third party source. It clearly fails Notability, and while I don't think it was intentional on the part of the article creator, it could very well fall under  Hoax. It really should just be speedy deleted, but it does not meet any of the criteria to make it eligible for that. Rorshacma (talk) 18:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Hmmm, interesting. I'll post a note on the Film Project's talkpage for more input.  Lugnuts  (talk) 19:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Several books on the subject of cinematic portrayal of Dracula speak about a silent 1920 film, since presumed lost, that was made by either Hungary or the Soviet Union. As the first of many films about a famous literary character, this film should satisfy the first criterion ("The film represents a unique accomplishment in cinema...") in the second set of inclusion criteria at WP:NF. With more thorough research (the above links took me less than 2 minutes to locate), I'm confident that additional sources can be found to expand the article into at least a properly cited stub. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 19:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. If reliable sources, such as those cited by Big Bird, only make sketchy references to a film that "might" have existed, about which nothing is known, maybe it would be better to incorporate that information (with sources) into the appropriate section of our overview article about Dracula adaptations: Dracula in popular culture.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Every book in my Google search that mentioned this film are like the ones supplied by BigBird - anecdotal and unsupported by anything other than a vague rumor. Adding to the confusion is the fact that some of them refer to this film as "Hungarian", not "Soviet" and "made in Russia" as stated in the article. No mention of screenings, production company, director - only the title and date. The word "presumed" appears quite often, which seems to apply to the film's existence, and if nobody is sure it even existed, how can it "represent a unique accomplishment in cinema"? As it stands now, you'd have to add "presumably" to that statement. If no significant coverage from reliable sources can be found, I tend to agree with Arxiloxos' suggestion above. Shirt  waist &#9742;  21:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources do not satisfy verifiability, since they only allude to a rumor of some such film having been made. Edison (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

—Michael Jester (talk &#183; contribs) 03:22, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete for the same reason Edison pointed out.
 * Comment: I think we are getting a bit confused here. A film that may not actually exist may be a notable subject because the rumor of its existence is notable.  The possible existence of this film does seem to be noted in a quick search of vampire-related books, so it may well merit an article.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The Dracula Book by Donald F. Glut published in 1975 mentions the possible movie, "Other film versions of Dracula are reported to have been made about this time — one being Russian — but there is no real verification to substantiate these claims." Some more recent books mention the possible Russian film without noting its questionable existence.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The film has an article on the Russian (and Ukrainian) wikipedia, I noticed, see ru:Дракула (фильм, 1920) (google translate link: ). The ru wikipedia article includes a link to a forum discussing the existence of the film (google translate link: ), and one poster scanned pages he says come from a Russian encylopedia, which mention the film, e.g., .  The ru article claims there are mentions of the films in Госфильмфонд, which I think they are saying is some film magazine.--Milowent • hasspoken  15:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete For above reasons, though I agree with Arxiloxos the controversy over its unlikely existence could be mentioned in Dracula in popular culture. -- Gothicfilm (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think Arxiloxos, and perhaps that editor can confirm or deny this, considers the film's existence as being "unlikely" in his above statement nor suggesting description of some sort of "controversy" be added anywhere. I think Arxiloxos' comment means to suggest that information about this film is better to be added Dracula in popular culture but also to be worded in such a way as to accurately describe what the sources state regarding the film's history without us making a determination one way or another about the country of origin (Hungary or the Soviet Union) or the year of production (1920 or 1921). Big Bird (talk • contribs) 16:46, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was referring to how it looked to me - I could have been clearer. But I must say your new deletion of the Skepticism section of the Drakula (1920 film) page makes my vote all the stronger that the whole page should go - though again the film's possible if unlikely existence should probably be mentioned at Dracula in popular culture. -- Gothicfilm (talk) 17:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The 1921 Hungarian film is supposedly a different film, btw, see Dracula's Death.--Milowent • hasspoken 18:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sources differ on that. I can't access the Cinefantastique article used as the only source for that article (an AfD for Dracula's Death might be warranted for that one as well), but a google search on "Drakula 1920" and "Dracula's Death" reveals authors giving conflicting dates (1920-1921), titles (Dracula-Drakula), and countries of origin (Russia-Hungary) - all with the qualifiers "supposedly", "presumably", and "it has been reported". The mystery surrounding this alleged film might merit inclusion in a more generalized article such as mentioned above, while stressing the conflicting sources, but there's not enough meat on the bone for a standalone article. Shirt  waist &#9742;  23:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge it into Dracula in popular culture. As is I just don't see how there is enough info to expand or even sustain a separate article for this item. MarnetteD | Talk 18:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to Dracula in popular culture. Shirt  waist &#9742;  23:23, 1 February 2012 (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.