Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Final Cut Pro 4 and the Art of Filmmaking

 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 DELETE. JeremyA 21:22, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Final Cut Pro 4 and the Art of Filmmaking
This is basically a third-party software manual; I don't see any evidence that there is anything encyclopedic to say about it. Many books are notable, but this one is not. CDC  (talk)  00:31, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Comment This article was around for over a year with at least an additional 25 lines or so extant in the earlier versions. These effectively were a TOC, but at least gave a reader a sense of what was in the book.  As such, the article is something of a book review.  If you're gonna vote, take a look at the truncation four or five versions back.  I think this needs a clean or possibly an attention, but delete seems a bit overdone as this seems to be more a case of sloppy or overzealous editting to a standard that need not apply for such a narrow focused  topic. Fabartus 03:08, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd argue that tables of contents and back-cover-type summaries are better done by other sites - perhaps Amazon. If that's the only neutral thing to say about a book (reviews aren't designed to be neutral), then I'd argue they're unencyclopedic. Some books have plenty to say about them, such as the context of their production or the influence they've had; think The Bell Curve or The Grapes of Wrath. I don't see any evidence that there is much to say about this book (or most software manuals). CDC   (talk)  15:40, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep - but retitle to "Final Cut Pro and the Art of Filmmaking" so that all the editions of this book (one for each version of FCP that comes out) will be discussed in one article. Blackcats 03:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * DELETE NN. Vanity. No actual info etc etc. -Snorre/Antwelm 14:16, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with CDC. --Xcali 15:56, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete: It seems to have been a mistake to have it, and the venerability of that mistake isn't really relevant. This particular book seems to be just another in the line of books explaining software and isn't any more notable than the general Que run. Geogre 18:41, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just another how-to book. --Carnildo 21:09, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Carnildo. carmeld1 02:50, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. If somebody really wants this info its right there in Amazon. Tobycat 06:09, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, spam. Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 11:07, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per other's delete vote rationale. Quale 18:29, 15 Jun 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 .