Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of film and television directors


 * 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. causa sui (talk) 17:13, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

List of film and television directors

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Nothing more than a list; much better dealt with through categories. violet/riga [talk] 20:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no valid deletion rationale here. Last things first: your assertion that this list should be deleted because the subject is "much better dealt with through categories" is contrary to WP:CLN, which represents the strong consensus that lists and categories may coexist as complementary formats for indexing articles.  That one format may perform a task better is not relevant to deletion unless you are using that as a comparison to illustrate why a particular format fails to do something even adequately.  No doubt this list could be made more useful, or subdivided in some way, but that's a matter for normal editing and discussion to determine.  And I simply don't get what you mean at all by saying this is "[n]othing more than a list", as lists don't have to be anything more than lists.  If by that you simply mean that this just lists article links without any annotations, that's not grounds for deletion, and it would in any event be fixable even if we decided that annotations were desirable here.  postdlf (talk) 21:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Lists are great... if they contain more than just a bunch of links. This is just a bunch of links with no other data.  If was more than an alphabetical list, perhaps saying when they were active or some other related data it might be worthwhile.  As it is, compare the article to Category:Film directors, or even better to the nicely organised Category:Film directors by language, Category:Film directors by genre, and Category:Lists of film directors by nationality.  Compare it to other director lists like List of directorial debuts, List of highest-grossing directors, or List of directors with two or more Academy Awards for Best Director.  I don't see the point of a list with the inclusion criteria of "they directed one or more films/music videos/episodes".  violet/riga [talk] 21:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Per WP:CLN, the existence of a category is not a valid reason to delete a corresponding list. Jclemens (talk) 23:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep No valid/policy based rationale supplied by the nominator for deletion and the list goes hand-in-hand with the category structure, per WP:CLN.  Lugnuts  (talk) 07:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per others' arguments that lists and categories are not mutually exclusive. If there is a problem with how the list presents the directors, then the list can be improved via editing and not deletion. A list being overly simple is not grounds for deletion; it is grounds for discussing what other information can be imparted in such a list. We could have birth date, country of origin, first film, most recent film, etc. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 19:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - This subject is so huge and unnecessary. The list will forever be incomplete and unmanageable. It just seems silly. Further, it only states the names, which a category can do. It has been said that more information can be added, but that would make it even more incomplete, and even more unmanageable. Vandals can easily change dates and make the information incorrect. Having this article exist just seems wrong. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has many lists that are forever incomplete; it is not a reason to delete. Nor is the potential for vandalism a reason to delete. Arguments for deletion need to be grounded in policies and guidelines. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 20:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems like every now and then, a couple editors discover, to their surprise and confusion, that lists exist on Wkipedia. And then we get these meritless AFDs that mainly raise complaints about the inherent limits of the list format, or even flaws inherent to most Wikipedia content.  "Delete, it's not perfect and requires work to maintain and develop." postdlf (talk) 20:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Or people have different views to you about the worth of such articles. No need to be rude.  violet/riga [talk] 20:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand that lists exist, but this list is too broad of a scope. You can't possibly think you can list every single person who has developed a film/tv show. With only listing their names, it seems silly to have such an article. Who would want to read this? What knowledge would you gain from this list? I don't understand what it's purpose is. "Oh, there is no director with a last name starting with X!"(the one currently in the category is wrong, as the first name starts with x, not the last name.) If you can answer how this list is useful, then I will rethink my stance. Blake (Talk·Edits) 22:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's an index of articles. It facilitates reader browsing and editing of related topics, like any other list of articles.  It might be that the list is fine as it is simply because there is utility simply in having all directors listed in one page, as a complement to the fragmented subdivisions of the Category:Directors category system, particularly given the international character of the film and TV industries, overlapping genres, etc.  If you are looking for coverage of a particular director, you may not remember how to spell his name (I constantly have this problem with Krzysztof Kieślowski) or have problems with diacritics, or you may not know whether he's British, Australian, or American, if his movies are shown in theaters around the world.  It might be that the list should be, while kept all on one page, further developed so as to have a annotated and perhaps sortable table with nationality, medium, birthdate/deathdate, years active, etc.  Or it might be that this should be split into a list of lists, as with the even more broad profession of writers.  So regardless of which way the list should go, the answer is normal editing and discussion, not deletion.  None of which has even been attempted, judging from the lack of talk page posts by the deletion nom.  Violetriga thinks I'm being rude for judging her deletion rationale harshly.  But given that the deletion comments thus far display very little substance (or effort) regarding this list and its potential, are contrary to relevant guidelines (WP:CLN), contrary to editing policy (WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM) and contrary to deletion policy (WP:ATD), these comments should be criticized so that hopefully such weak and wasteful AFDs won't be started in the future.  postdlf (talk) 23:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Your keep rationale is mainly based on "it could be good" rather than looking at the current state of the article. Yes, there is potential, but when compared to the articles I noted above this list is poor.  Throw guidelines and policies at me all you want, but I don't see the use of this article as it is right now.  Saying that this is contrary to policy is merely a dismissal of another person's views and opinions, and it's a shame that you have resorted to that.  I still await some sort of reasoning from you as to why this is not already adequately covered elsewhere, but then you'll probably be rude again so I won't hold my breath for a sensible discussion.  violet/riga [talk] 00:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The current state of the article does not factor into whether or not the topic's article should be deleted. WP:BEFORE says, "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD." Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 03:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - it seems to be a textbook example of what WP:CLN certifies as "wikipedic". "Encyclopedic" is difficult to discern as encyclopedias in general have different standards for lists; some are full of them, some abhor them, but CLN is where suitability for Wikipedia is laid out and we should defer to it. It clearly needs work but there's definitely potential to "add value" compared to categories or navboxes. TheGrappler (talk) 02:15, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. What exactly is the inclusion criteria here?  A list of anyone who has ever directed anything ever?  Or a list of directors who have worked in both film and television?  If the former, then it is useless.  If the latter, then it has potential.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The former, as far as I can see. But why would it be useless? If simply because it is doomed to become too big, then it can always be split into sublists once it is more fully developed. TheGrappler (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * So, is everyone unsure what this is for? In any case, I reckon delete.  Borderline indiscriminate, and is just a duplication of List of film directors with some television directors added.  Wouldn't it be better to have a List of television directors instead?  Fail to see the usefulness of this as a standalone page, due to its vast scope.  However I could see some merit of a List of directors who have worked in both film and television or the like.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah - didn't realise that List of film directors redirected here. Two distinct lists - List of film directors and List of television directors - would be FAR more useful than this one (although personally I feel them a little unnecessary).  So, now I reckon split.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2011 (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.