Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of highest-paid 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   delete all; however, allow recreation. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 02:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

List of highest-paid directors

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

Completely unsourced list, rife with speculation, and likely so incomplete as to make any rankings demonstrably inaccurate. I'm not against the idea of such a page, but unfortunately this current version fails enough policies and guidelines as to make its existence in this form undesirable. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages on similar grounds:


 * Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY wikipedia is not a place for loosely associated lists. The information is also impossible to verify and changes constantly. AlbinoFerret (talk) 22:57, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:55, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Opinion there are definately significant problems with the articles as it is, most obviously the almost complete lack of sourcing (The fact that all the information pertains to living people making adequate sourcing all the more necessary). However the amount actors and directors are paid has probably been covered in reliable sources (like this one) and I think acceptable articles in the vein of List of highest-grossing films (see Articles for deletion/List of highest-grossing films) could probably be written. If no one can improve the articles so that they meet our standards of verifiability and no original research I think they should be deleted with no prejudice against recreating once all the information has been reliably sourced. Guest9999 (talk) 23:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - given the secrecy surrounding exact dollar amounts it is doubtful that proper sourcing is even possible. Also list serves very little purpose --T-rex 02:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Exact dollar amounts are not needed for this. It can be reliable enough. The limitations ofthe sourcing merely have to be given, since we are concerned with verifiability only, not truth. Collecting publicly available figures is not OR. DGG (talk) 03:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all 3 The problem is sources: there are none, and the information currently in these lists is not verifiable. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:08, 17 June 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.