Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Brooksfilms productions


 * 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 keep. T. Canens (talk) 23:00, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Brooksfilms productions

 * – ( View AfD View log  of Brooksfilms productions Stats )

Delete There is not a single source for List of Brooksfilms productions. Although Brooksfilms was founded by Mel Brooks, this article doesn't even mentions that got either Oscar wins or nominations. There are also no indications of notability, and it fails GNG and WP:NCORP. This is why it should be deleted. Evil Idiot (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 January 22.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 15:44, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

postdlf (talk) 18:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This would seem to be complementary to Category:Brooksfilms films, and it is standard to index articles on notable films by their production companies. I don't know why it should matter for this purpose whether Brooksfilms as a company satisfies GNG (though I'd be surprised if it doesn't), as this isn't an article on the company per se but, again, a standard index of notable films. I also don't see a credible claim that such information is not verifiable, and the films' credits would presumably verify this even if nowhere else (just as you don't need a secondary source to verify a book's publisher). Maybe there's an argument that the nominator has not presented, but I'm not seeing a compelling reason for deletion or even a legitimate concern here. postdlf (talk) 16:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As no counterargument has been presented to my observations, this is a keep from me. postdlf (talk) 16:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep refs would help but are already available on the individual film articles. Includes extra info to the category such as gross and production company, an awards column could be added but as it is it serves as a useful index page. Atlantic306 (talk) 18:47, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Why exactly is this needed? There's already a category performing the same function. We don't keep lists of "Burgers made by McDonalds" or "Furniture made by Ikea". Why is this different? Dolescum (talk) 13:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:WEDONTNEEDIT, WP:NOTDUP, and WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST for a hint at why your comment hasn't advanced the discussion, not to mention the fact that while all of the films listed here are notable, meriting their own articles, the same would not be true of the products you listed as inapt comparisons (but see also List of McDonald's products).
 * Actually, I would refer you to read WP:NOTDIR and note that this could very easily be seen as a sales catalogue or list of products and the notability of the individual works is irrelevant to that. Throwing up accusations that my comment "hasn't advanced the discussion" looks rather defensive of you on the matter. I'd also remark that the several McDonald's products are apt comparisons as several products, such as the Big Mac, are cultural icons. Can you offer an argument as to what this list offers over a self-maintaining category, given that it simply replicates information already present in the individual articles? Dolescum (talk) 05:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Sortability; annotations on distribution studio, year of release, and gross; and the possibility of direct sourcing. And no, I don't think this could "verily easily be seen as a sales catalogue" (yet the category poses no problem to you?), it's a list of notable films released over a span of decades, not a catalog of home media prices or a directory of theater showtimes (and if it had that information we would fix it by removing it). And please do read all of NOTDIR: "Wikipedia encompasses many lists of links to articles within Wikipedia that are used for internal organization or to describe a notable subject. In that sense, Wikipedia functions as an index or directory of its own content." postdlf (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I do see this as someone attempting to build a list of entertainment products released by Brooksfilm. You'll note category 4. Despite the fact the tone of your responses has been so obnoxious I feel like declaring delete simply to spite you, I think the reasoning underlying your responses is good, so keep. Dolescum (talk) 21:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:04, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 13:17, 6 February 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 05:39, 14 February 2018 (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.