Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Monster Movies


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 03:25, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Monster Movies

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Do we need an article listing monster movies? This could be merged with Monster movie to provide a list of significant films. Mr. Vernon (talk) 21:12, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I think this was testing the waters, since there are only four entries. It doesn't appear that there has been a separate list of monster movies, surprisingly, since it seems like there's a list for everything else.  I agree that notable films can continue to be mentioned in the main article.  Mandsford (talk) 22:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't imagine what a list on monster movies could provide that a category can't. WP:CLN Regardless, such a list is unlikely to be comprehensive. - Mgm|(talk) 23:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You can't imagine why giving the year, director, country of original etc would be useful? Juzhong (talk) 02:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Such a list might indeed be useful, but the discussion is about this list. Mandsford (talk) 02:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete (G2) — This smells more like a test page than anything else. MuZemike  ( talk ) 00:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete--Muzemike is correct. Drmies (talk) 02:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 'Keep and expand there is no reason why we should not have a list, and deleting an incomplete article 4 minutes after it has been made is BITEy. Better to add notable ones to the article--there are quite enough for a good list. DGG (talk) 05:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep How do I keep thee? Let me count the ways:
 * The nominator is proposing a merge and so has come to the wrong place.
 * The talk above about a test page seems bizarrely irrelevant.
 * WP:CLS says clearly that lists are not superseded by categories.
 * The topic has massive notability.
 * Wikipedia is not Crush, Crumble and Chomp!
 * Colonel Warden (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The "you've come to the wrong place" argument is never persuasive. Mr. Vernon was not proposing a merge, but rather saying that the article should be deleted and that (at nomination time) the scant information could be placed elsewhere.  However, I see signs that you are trying to make this  a better article, so I think that we should hold off on a decision.  Sourcing is good, and I hope that you (or someone else willing to help improve) will add some context.  Mandsford (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Nominating for deletion only a few minutes after creation doesn't really give this a chance. There should be plenty of notable potential additions to this list. Wiw8 (talk) 14:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, I think that the nomination was probably the best thing that could have happened to this article. Otherwise, it likely would have gone unnoticed by other persons who would improve upon it.  It's still not much of an article, but it appears that at least one editor is working to make it more encyclopedic. Mandsford (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Reads like a test page, not an encyclopedia article. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll change to keep per the improvements made in the article above. No longer a test page. Note that I was thinking of WP:CHANCE at first, but even those articles are not immune to speedy deletion for good reasons. MuZemike  ( talk ) 16:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and let it be improved. It got tossed to AfD waaaaay too soon. Give it a chance as there is no WP:DEADLINE.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:42, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Monster movie, which is sparse as it is. We also have a category for monster movies, so anything highlighted at the main article should be significant as reliably sourced. — Erik  (talk • contrib) 18:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete with no prejudice against recreation. This list seems a bit like a test edit, but it's undeniable that it's unfinished (or anywhere near conclusive). If the author wants to carry it on, he can asked to have it saved to his sandbox and work on it there, then re-add to the main space when he's finished, that what the rest of us have to do. Ryan 4314   (talk) 11:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No, our editing policy encourages the submission of slight stubs so that the community may assist in their development. It is like the fable of the Stone Soup or many hands make light work. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ya know if you hadn't put the "no" at the start, you would've totally charmed me into submission lol ;) Ryan 4314   (talk) 15:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Your submission is not required because this is not a vote. My point was to indicate that your observations were contrary to official policy and so should be discounted.  I elaborate here as you may wish to point to some countervailing policy. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Love you too xXx Ryan 4314   (talk) 05:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, not as good as List of zombie films or list of giant monster films. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZombiesOfRock (talk • contribs) 17:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I would be stunned if there was no reliable source that compiled an exhaustive or near-exhaustive list of monster movies. Stunned.  This is a reasonable list (rather than the usual List of XYZ genre films but with ABC twist) and can work regardless of it being redundant to a category. Protonk (talk) 22:03, 23 December 2008 (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.