Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Criterion Collection UK releases


 * 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 no consensus.  A  Train ''talk 22:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

List of Criterion Collection UK releases

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not independently notable. Doesn't add anything that can't be included at List of Criterion Collection DVD and Blu-ray releases simply by adding a footnote for all the releases that have also had a UK release. (Also, the spine numbers are incorrect, but that isn't a reason to delete!) --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:27, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge to List of Criterion Collection DVD and Blu-ray releases. It appears the spine numbers are in fact the same as the North American releases. It would be trivial to add a column or footnotes to indicate a UK release. There's no benefit to having a separate article. Reach Out to the Truth 17:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947 (c)  00:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC) I agree that everything in the article can be merged with List of Criterion Collection DVD and Blu-ray releases. Numbering, however, is not by spine number (even though that would have been useful in the UK article too) but instead by the order of release in the UK marketplace; and this in itself is useful info, and should be included in case the two articles are merged. The same goes for having the information on announced, upcoming UK releases (many of which are already released in the US). As a result, I would not use footnotes but instead create a new column in the table for the UK releases (i.e. the title of the column would be "UK release" and the lines list either a date or nothing (or a colour-coded date for an upcoming release). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teehex (talk • contribs) 06:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The UK numbering is WP:SYNTH. There were six releases on the same day (numbered 1 to 6), but they have been arbitrarily numbered here.  The US Criterion release dates aren't mentioned, so it would give WP:UNDUE weight to the UK release dates if we included them.  A footnote with "also released in the UK" (or similar) should suffice.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947 (c)  00:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:LISTNAME. --David Tornheim (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a naming guideline. Which part do you feel applies to this deletion discussion? Reach Out to the Truth 23:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. A major media distributor--we have similar list of notable works distributed or broadcast -- it's an accepted part of the encyclopedia .  DGG ( talk ) 03:35, 7 May 2017 (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.