Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olympic films


 * 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.  Majorly  (o rly?) 18:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Olympic films

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

An indiscriminate mix of "Official films of the Olympic Games" (which are notable) along with just about any film that features the Olympics or mentions the word "olympic", such as The Year of the Sex Olympics, The M*A*S*H Olympics, Hanna-Barbera's Animalympics, Pink Panther in the Olym-pinks, Buck Rogers in the 25th Century Olympiad. Also features the usual Simpsons/Futurama references, even though those aren't films. I did attempt to start to improve it, because I think there's a good list somewhere in all the clutter, but the article's creator doesn't appear to want any changes made. Without any improvements, it's just too indiscriminate. Croxley 03:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as an indiscriminate list and directory with no clear criteria for inclusion. The list encompasses live-action films, animated films, live-action TV episodes and animated series, dealing with actual Olympics, fictional Olympics, things called "Olympics" which are not Olympics and anything that has "-lympics" in its name regardless of whether there is any actual relationship between the Olympics and the list item. Otto4711 03:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, but IMHO only the last section ("references" to the Olympics in films like Airport '79) is out-and-out ridiculous. The rest of the page could conceivably be put into category namespace, as Category:Olympic films (per Category:Olympic video games), although a clear separation between documentaries and fictional or fictionalized storylines would be nice. --Quuxplusone 08:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Clean-up It seems like you're having a content dispute with the author's creator, but like The article about the Marines, this subject is still able to be covered, so deletion is not the solution. Go to Dispute resolution instead.  Talk to the user a bit more, try to persuade them.  Using an AfD like this though?  It's a bad idea.  It's likely to be offensive, and should not have been done without a more serious effort to reach consensus.   FrozenPurpleCube 15:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I originally considered nominating this list last week, before I even made an edit to the article. Just because an editor reverted one small edit is not a reason for nominating, I think my other AFDs have demonstrated I understand perfectly what AFDs are for. If someone else had nominated this article, I would still vote for deletion. I believe it's little more than an Olympics in popular culture with a misleading title. Croxley 21:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not normally keep tabs on people, I honestly don't know whether or not you've nominated anything before at all. I can't recall your name ever coming to my attention.  So I am considering this issue solely on your nomination here.  The article is about a reasonably encyclopedic subject, both in the case of the individual films of the games, and an overall summary.  Now certainly including every single little television episode or movie that features the Olympics in some way is probably not appropriate, and I'm undecided yet as to films like Cool Runnings and the like, but whatever the decision is, that's a content issue, not one as to the subject.  Oh, and BTW, AfD is not a vote.  You are taking a position, I have a position, others have their positions, but this isn't a vote.  FrozenPurpleCube 02:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Correct, this is not a "vote", but I was using the term to refer to my "recommendation". Admin sometimes use the word when closing AFDs as well. But you're quite right to point it out in case anyone else might think this is a ballot. Croxley 06:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Using the word vote is sloppy, whether it's a user or an admin, sometimes that is excusable, but if nobody ever says "Hey, remember, this isn't a vote!" then people may be mislead. If you see any admins regularly using vote to describe their closings, I suggest advising them to avoid that language.  FrozenPurpleCube 14:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and clean up. Suggestion to nominator:  be bold and remove the items that are not actually about the Olympics. Tarinth 18:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - not the worst 'film list' I've seen, but close. Possibly categorise the important ones as Quuxplusone suggested. Masaruemoto 19:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem with that is that several of the official films are currently redlinked. What can be done about that?  FrozenPurpleCube 02:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per Otto4711, maybe merge a list of the official Olympic films into a small section of the Olympic Games article. Plasticbottle 06:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I made some proposal for clean up in the talk page. Inclusion and exclusion from the list should be based on reliable and uniform criteria. Fmon 15:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and remind author what collaboration means.  Establish criteria for the page and clean it up.  If the author continues to obstruct improvement of the article, file an RFC.  AfD is not the answer to editor behavior problems, and this article can be salvaged.  Jerry 22:00, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Indiscriminant list. Why are the biographies of Tai Babilonia, Jim Thorpe and Jesse Owens listed in "Fictional Films"? How many of these are made-for-television or staight-to-video/DVD? Without a clear focus, this article quickly devolves into a mess. Caknuck 16:43, 4 April 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.