Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Wars Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith Review


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Denelson83 21:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith Review
The article title says it all. POV, original research ... take your pick. 23skidoo 00:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 00:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This comes up more often at Wikinews than it does at Wikipedia, but the situation is the same here as there. Indeed, it is the same across all Wikimedia Foundation projects.  The Neutral Point of View policy, which is a foundation issue and non-negotiable, prevents any of the projects from publishing people's original reviews of things.  The place for publishing one's personal opinions on things is one's own web site.  Delete. Uncle G 00:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Well, one could create a Wikicities page for their personal reviews.  User:Zoe|(talk) 04:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikicites is not a Wikimedia Foundation project. It is run by Wikia. Uncle G 11:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I was replying to your comment The place for publishing one's personal opinions on things is one's own web site, not to Wikicities' relationship with Wikimedia. :)  User:Zoe|(talk) 01:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Inherently POV. Cnwb 01:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete The attempt amuses me for some reason though. --W.marsh 01:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - I pick 'original research' Turnstep 01:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Linuxbeak | Alex Schenck 01:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:ISNOT a publisher of critical reviews. encephalon  02:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC) 
 * Delete, we're not IMDb.-LtNOWIS 04:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Can I play. What is POV, and Original research Alex? Knowledge Of Self  |  talk . 05:17, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - "Original research" - POV ERcheck 06:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. NSLE  ( 讨论 ) \< extra > 07:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as above. Pintele Yid 08:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nominator, an encyclopedia is not a subjective review guide based upon original research. Yamaguchi先生 08:15, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not the place for film reviews. - Mgm|(talk) 12:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per everyone. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 13:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete &#8766; Just adding my delete vote because I didn't wanna be left out. →  Ξxtreme Unction { yak yak yak ł blah blah blah } 14:03, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, I was gonna nominate this. Punkmorten 15:25, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above. --Syrthiss 15:40, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, editorials and reviews violate no original research policy, though the original writer is encouraged to post their work to IMDB. HGB 10:47, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete original POV -=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 13:26, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's a pure review. *drew 02:29, 16 November 2005 (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.