Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of romantic leads with actress older


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 10:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

List of romantic leads with actress older

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - indiscriminate list and directory seeking to capture examples of any film where the lead actress is older than the lead actor, regardless of whether the age difference has any significance either in the film or in the real-life relationship between the two. The entire intro is POV/OR, a number of the listed relationships are not clearly "romantic leads" which thus requires POV judgment in deciding to include them and the standard for inclusion can never be anything but arbitrary. Whoever made the list apparently decided that a three year age difference was the cutoff point since that's the closest in age that's listed, but there is no possible objective reason for setting the age gap at any number. Otto4711 01:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete listcruft. How incredibly arbitrary! --Action Jackson IV 03:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete In most of those films it's not even significant to the plot, and List_of_films_featuring_May-December_romances deals with that subject. Interesting fact: There's the same age difference between Olivia Newton-John and John Travolta as there was between Anne Bancroft and Dustin Hoffman, I'll have to remember that one Croxley 03:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom much arbitrary and in most of them age diff is not in the plotline.--Paloma Walker 03:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete get your list on. /Blaxthos 05:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete completely non-notable. Wikipedia is not a place for random lists. /Callix 21:18 21 March 2007 (EDST) (Aus)
 * Keep Ageism against women in Hollywood casting of romantic leads is a frequent topic in the news. A list of movies, with stars and their age differences, which defy that trend is an important resource.  The List_of_films_featuring_May-December_romances does not address the same issue.  A call for deletion needs a discussion at Talk:List_of_films_featuring_May-December_romances since if these entries were added to that page, it would be distracting to people seeking intended May-December romance films and not ones due to casting. Ignoble 13:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ignoble. This is hardly an "indiscriminate list"; the criteria for inclusion are clear enough, and can be verified by linking to the pages about the actors in question.  If differences less than two years should be added, let them be added.  The data compiled here are of interest to some folks for the reasons related by Ignoble, among others. The list helps interested people find and compare them, and as such serves a valuable indexing function.  - Smerdis of Tlön 14:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What, specifically, quoting from the article, are the clear inclusion criteria? Otto4711 14:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * ". . . (W)here the actress is older than her leading man. . . " It's hard to get more algorithmic than that. - Smerdis of Tlön 15:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * How much older is old enough to warrant inclusion? The editor who started the list seemed to feel that a three year difference was the cutoff point, but did not offer any explanation as to why. You have suggested that age differences of less than three years can be included. What objective standard is there for choosing any age difference? Otto4711 16:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact that a list is incomplete, or that the original author chose not to add to it any more after some point, is not grounds for deleting it; much less does it turn it into an "indiscriminate list" as the nominator claims. - Smerdis of Tlön 18:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The question that I asked was "what objective standard is there for choosing any age difference?" Do you have an answer to that question or not? Otto4711 20:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By now I haven't a clue what you're continuing to argue about. The criterion is as simple as could be: if the figure from column A is greater than the one in B, it belongs.  The fact that the creator chose not to go deeper than a certain point does not change that, and doesn't need to reflect an "objective standard"; it's just a point where they chose to stop writing, that is all.  We should delete the article on pi until the final digit is reached, right?  - Smerdis of Tlön 22:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, actually, that's exactly what I'm saying, I'm saying exactly that pi should be deleted unless it's calculated to the last number. Oh wait, I'm saying nothing even remotely similar to that and have no idea why you even bring it up! Otto4711 22:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete how much older? Is it stated in the script, or do we have secondary sources?  Is it significant to the plot?  Are you trying to seduce me, Mrs. Robinson?  Oh, that last one might be a quote. Guy (Help!) 14:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. The specifics are pretty well covered by the above. Arkyan 15:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Arkyan. Sheesh. JuJube 17:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this list as a topic completely unsuitable for a serious encyclopedia. Mr. Berry 17:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NOT and OR/POV: the list is clearly trying to promote an agenda, which is hardly the purpose of Wikipedia. Of minimal, if any, encyclopedic value. Moreschi Request a recording? 18:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above arguments. Wikipedia doesn't need a list for every single obscure topic. — Pious7Talk Contribs 21:07, 21 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.