Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films featuring mental illness


 * 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 Adam Cuerden talk 18:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

List of films featuring mental illness

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - Wikipedia is not a repository of loosely-associated topics. That a film has a mentally ill character or characters in it is not sufficient to justify this article. Otto4711 03:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film and TV-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 23:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 23:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well-defined list, useful for a discussion of the perception of mental illness in society.  And because it is divided by disorder, it would be difficult to duplicate with a category.  However, the list should be limited to situations where mental illness is a major part of the story, not just films that have a mentally ill character somewhere in them.  The other option would be for someone to move each sub-list to the article on each type of mental disorder. Crypticfirefly 06:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Loose association. Could be categorised if required. A list is meant to have some sort meaningful entry data, not just a list of names, otherwise it is merely a category listing.--Dacium 06:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this is not categorizable (sift through CfD logs if you don't believe me). JuJube 07:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Although I have edited the list numerous times myself, I must vote to delete. It is not maintainable. People will always insert POV and OR into the list. The list is not well defined at all. Inclusion criteria have not been clearly established and really cannot be. Most films have some characters who appear to qualify for a mental illness. Does the article define mental illness? Does it say it should only include characters presented as having been diagnosed with specific mental illnesses? Not at all. Doczilla 08:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The list looks better than most of these "List of movies" articles, as the movies listed actually seem to deal with mental illnesses as a major theme, at least as far as I am familiar with the films listed.  However I ahve to agree with the above and go with deletion based on the arbitrary inclusion criteria. Arkyan 18:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * delete per nom. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 21:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. This list is not like most of the other "List of films..." lists.  Mental illness figures prominently in all or most of these movies as a major plot theme.  And no, it is not OR to call something a "major plot theme" because it can be sourced by movie reviews.  -- Black Falcon 22:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Well-defined and useful list. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. per Josiah Rowe, Crypticfirefly, Black Falcon and others. -- Stbalbach 04:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Well-defined list as per above. Note that this is a specific and notable genre, and many actors casted in that role have received Oscar award or nomination, as in Philadelphia, Rain man, I am Sam, Aviator, As Good as It Gets. Suggest expand to add the actor/actress casted in the role, provide note on Oscar awards/nomination. --Vsion 05:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Well-defined list but could use some explanation of which characters have the mental illness/impact on film. Also as listed by Vsion if there were any awards that the actors may have worn for portraying the illness. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nehrams2020 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep but needs frequent cleanup to make sure entries involve a major plot theme. Such "featuring" lists can easily start including just about any background detail. Hoverfish Talk 08:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment to those who want this list kept because it is "well-defined": How well-defined the list is is not under contention. The list could be the most perfectly-defined list in the world and that definition does not address the assertion of the nomination that the subjects of the list are too loosely associated. Yes, all of the listed films have a mentally ill character. That is all that the listed films have in common. They do not otherwise share sufficient similarity to warrant being listed together. There has been no refutation of that assertion. Otto4711 00:39, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply/Rebuttal. Actually, if you look more closely at the list, that is not what they have in common.  What they have in common is mental illness as a major plot theme or plot device.  These are not movies that feature a mentally ill person in a bed while the camera is panning through a hospital hallway.  In all of these movies, at least one of the main characters is mentally ill and the storyline is largely driven by the presence and/or characteristics of this mental illness.  Your assertion "they do not ... share sufficient similarity to warrant being listed together" is your opinion, but I respectfully disagree.  That a film's plot focuses on and/or revolves around the presence/characteristics of a mental illness is more than enough association.  -- Black Falcon 03:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just looking at one subset of the list, that of AIDS-related dementia. I haven't seen The Hours so I can't comment on it, but "Philadelphia" does not hinge on any character's having AIDS-related dementia. The character doesn't get fired for having AIDS-related dementia, the plot is not advanced by his having AIDS-related dementia, there is IIRC no mention of AIDS-related dementia until very late in the film. "Angels in America" similarly does not feature a charatcer with AIDS-related dementia. The character has what are apparently divinely-inspired visions. Even if, though, both characters did indeed have AIDS-related dementia, the films are so diverse that listed them together as "films featuring mental illness" is ludicrous. Neither film features mental illness. They aren't about the characters dealing with mental illness. The stories are completely divergent in plot, development and tone. One is about a lawyer suing over AIDS discrimination. The other is about a man being used as an instrument of the Almighty. An article on how AIDS has been presented on film would be very encyclopedic and I would be very interested in reading it. A mishmash list of films thrown together because they's got the AIDS in 'em or any other illness (mental or otherwise) is garbage. Otto4711 14:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment if one film (or a few films) have been listed erroneously, then delete them from the list! By itself, that is not a reason to delete the entire article. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. If there are films on the list that do not belong, please go ahead and remove them.  However, you make a hasty generalization to condem the whole list.  Consider the films: Rain Man, 50 First Dates, and Radio.  Do you really intend to argue that these films don't feature mental illness?  That they aren't about characters dealing with mental illness?  That the entire storyline is based on the existence and/or characteristics of the illness?  That the plots of those films could exist in the absence of the illness?  If it will satisfy your concerns, I can modify the list as per User:Saberwyn/Films featuring the United States Marine Corps (adding additional information to the list, imposing stringent inclusion guidelines--actually, the latter should be done in any case if the list is kept).  However, I suspect that you object to the entire premise of the list itself and are not willing to accept any modification or improvement as sufficient.  I would be most happy to discover myself in error in this case, so please correct me if I'm wrong. -- Black Falcon 18:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment If you are willing to improve this and related lists, perhaps merging some, that would be very helpful.--agr 22:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I see absolutely no reason why Wikipedia is not a repository of loosely-associated topics would apply to this article, and the list is about a topic of cultural importance - the portrayal of mental illness in fiction. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:LIST: information and navigation. Featuring mental illness is sufficient commonality. - Peregrine Fisher 01:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - well-defined list. Films closely-associated because of their common thematic element.--JayHenry 21:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - in addition to reasons already given, almost all listed moves will have Wikipedia articles, so this list serves as an index to related articles. In case of a questionable inclusion, the reader can go to the article for more details.--agr 22:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -I don't like "List of..." articles, but an article on mental illness depicted in film would be legitimate. I'd like to see this article evolve.--Absurdist 01:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Most "List of..." articles are indeed pointless, but this one seems to focus on serious issues that could aid people in research, such as how disorders are presented in multimedia, a topic I actually had to write a paper on in college.--User:Schwenkstar 15:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Save this for a movie-trivia site. Usedup 01:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, article is well sourced and compiling lists from external data is definately not the same as OR. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 21:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I went around actually searching to see if we had an article for this (by clicking on "What links here" for As Good As It Gets), and was pleased to find this. Macarenaman 09:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Topic is notable and article is well sourced. --Parker007 17:58, 2 March 2007 (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.