Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shields Pictures, Inc.


 * 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. WP:CORP requires third party coverage. Sandstein 07:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Shields Pictures, Inc.

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Previously nominated at Articles for deletion/Shields Pictures. I am renominating because that nomination was confused partly by nominating Shields Pictures along with some of their film series which are notable (but the articles were closely based on copyrighted material, and so were deleted by me as copyvios). As far as I can tell, Shields Pictures didn't have any role in producing these notable film clips, they just own them now and license them to others. No evidence that Shields Pictures itself meets WP:CORP. Mango juice talk 14:50, 9 March 2007 (UTC) This is Mark Punswick, President and owner of Shields Pictures. The person who posted this entry (as well as entries for our 3 historic Paramount series "Popular Science," "Unusual Occupations" and "Speaking of Animals" - all of which have been deleted according to what I've been told) contacted me and asked me to post a statement. I'm doing this purely as a courtesy to them as apparently they invested quite a bit of time and effort in listing information about us and our series on Wikipedia. For the uninitiated our film library holdings document important and historic personalities and events of the 20th Century. Our collections contain the earliest known film footage of Dr. Seuss, the earliest known color film on Philo T. Farnsworth, the Building of the Mount Palomar Space Telescope, the Building of Boulder/Hoover Dam, the Building of the San Francisco Bay Bridge, the only known film footage of Paul Garber - founder of the Smithsonian Institute's Air and Space Museum, Frank Lloyd Wright, and on and on. We have a standing policy with academic institutions, researchers and archives in that we make selections available for viewing at no cost (we pay for transfer and shipping) which sets us apart from companies such as the Getty and Corbis (I just checked and both purely commercial enterprises have fairly substantial listings on Wikipedia so I fail to see what the issues are here). We also make 35mm film prints available for archival screenings all across the country and at no charge (we archive our film print masters with the UCLA FILM and Television Archives and sometimes they charge a small fulfillment fee but we never do). Content Listings for the series had apparently been posted (which is fine by me - this information is also available from the Library of Congress and the New York State Archives albeit not as easily searchable) and were subsequently deleted by Wikipedia editors. In perusing prior postings, deletions and comments I was quite dismayed to see statements posted by Wikipedia editors referring to the Academy Awards as a "popularity contest" and was a bit taken aback by the aforementioned comment referring to our holdings as rubbish. I have done was what was requested of me and now leave it to you fine folks to determine the outcome. If someone has a legitimate comment, question or request (no rants please) they can contact me at.
 * Delete. Fails WP:ATT.  No sources. —Carolfrog 22:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Take this rubbish out to the curb. Nardman1 22:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &rArr;    SWAT Jester    On Belay!  19:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Good point about the sources, sorry they were overlooked - I have made the corrections. CCBear 23:45, 14 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.