Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet Movie Database

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy keep: bad faith nomination. Nominator has been blocked for multi-voting and vote tampering. &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 22:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Internet Movie Database
This page should be purged from wikipedia, because It is inaccurate. The IMDb is a very low quality site, often containing inaccurate or false information. Therefore Wikipedia should no longer associate itself with such rubbish.
 * Nominated by 84.65.124.160


 * Strong Keep. Content and accuracy disputes belong on an articles talk page, not VFD. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) 12:17, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as Blu Advark and ban the anon IP for persistant vandalism. Close this pointless VFD ASAP. The JPS 12:19, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete This page must be deleted as inaccurate articles degrade the overall quality of Wikipedia. Get rid of it! User:84.65.124.160 12:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Clearly a bad faith nomination from an anon with an axe to grind. There is no debating the notability of this website. 23skidoo 12:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * What the bloody f*ck? IMDB is one of the most notable websites out there. The nomination is clearly in bad faith. Whatever next, nominating eBay or Sourceforge for deletion? Or why not the US Government website? Strong keep.   &mdash; J I P | Talk 12:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't give him ideas. The JPS 12:45, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Obvious keep - the IMDb page has been subject to an inordinate amount of vandalism lately ... -- Lochaber 13:07, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep and kick the ass of the person who posted this --malathion talk 13:08, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. As said above this is an easy one. --Tony Hecht 13:12, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable website. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:13, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Questions of accuracy do not detract from its notability. --Pagrashtak 13:22, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep I don't know exactly what the nominator is trying to get at here, but even if it were true, the accuracy of IMDB's contents does not have any bearing on whether it gets an entry. It's in the top 50 sites in the world according to Alexa, and has high recognisability all over the web. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  14:42, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, LART nominator. humblefool&reg; 14:47, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Obvious candidate for speedy keep. Once again, I ask the question. If we don't count the votes of anonymous users in this forum as we shouldn't why are they allowed to nominate articles. Capitalistroadster 17:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Gateman1997 17:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, this was a bad faith deletion of one of the most notable sites on the internet.


 * Speedy Delete This article gives a bad impression of Wikipedia overall, as it is highly biased. I personally believe that the article must be deleted and all links to the IMDb from movie articles on Wikipedia should be removed, and clearly i am not the only one which holds this view. a vote by 84.65.124.160, the same person who nominated the page in the first place - --Stevefarrell 18:20, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, and anonymous trolls should not be allowed to nominate on VFD. Tempshill 18:15, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy keep what a ludicrous nomination. For a start, IMDB is not low quality by any stretch the definition can take, it is a highly informative and accurate site. This is a bad faith nomination, probably from someone who couldn't find a picture of Halle Berry in a tight top. --Stevefarrell 18:20, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. No doubt that IMdb is notable and relevant. A lot of references in wikipedia, so keep it. Information are not always true (nor in wikipedia), but you can ask them to review false informations (Already done, were wikipedia seem to have right information and IMdb not). -- Cate 19:07, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy keep CanadianCaesar 19:09, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy keep Pointless argument, with the only delete votes on here coming from the person who nominated it. I understand the keep or delete debates over random blog enteries, but over one of the top sites on the internet?--Johnsoqj 19:44, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy keep - bad faith nomination, the only contributions of the nominator are vandalism of the page in question and of this page. &mdash;PrologFan {Talk} 20:05, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. WTF is wrong with this nominator?  This is one of the most popular websites on the internet.  Thorns Among Our Leaves 20:41, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it yesterday, infinity nominated by vandal & troll, no further discussion req. &infin; Who ? &iquest; ?  21:03, 25 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.