Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zadar! Cow From Hell


 * 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 keep. W.marsh 13:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Zadar! Cow From Hell
With respect to any editors from eastern Iowa; any film that hasn't reached beyond there struggles to establish notability. And when the most memorable line is "The Movies are coming, The movies are coming." I think that says it all! BlueValour 01:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Film premiered at the Sundance Film Festival, is listed at the IMDb, Yahoo! Movies, the New York Times, and is shown to generally exist with a Google search. Obscure content isn't harmful and Wikipedia is not paper. The article does not claim undue importance; it states that it is an independent film not known to many outside Iowa, and that's what it is. The article does need cleanup; I was about to do that when I saw it had been listed for deletion (in between my reading and my going to edit). So now instead of cleaning up, I've spent that time finding links, but I suppose I was going to do that anyways.
 * Also, the nomination is borderline on incivility/personal attack against people from eastern Iowa (which I guess the author is). There doesn't seem to be any reason to delete, besides maybe a dislike of movies from Iowa. --Keitei (talk) 03:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * 'incivility/personal attack'? Don't be silly - the point I was making, obviously badly, is that a film that has not reached beyond part of a state (any state) is struggling for notability. WP:AGF. I am from the UK and know nothing about Iowa, never mind have anything against them! It has also failed to get any major DVD release. I am not arguing that it is not a worthy film simply that it does not seem to meet WP notability standards. BlueValour 04:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * a dislike of movies from Iowa A pretty huge category, I'm sure. Corn noir! Love among the soybeans! --Calton | Talk 04:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, hence "borderline". It could be misconstrued as such. With notability proven (in my opinion), what remains is the tacky memorable line, which probably speaks for the quality of the movie itself.... but dislike of Iowa movies isn't a deletion criterion. :] --Keitei (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Very strong keep. I think Keitei has proved beyond a doubt that the film is notable. Jude (talk) 04:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Pretty obscure, but I have heard of it (no, I'm not from Iowa) because of its creators, the Duck's Breath Mystery Theater, whose alums include Dan Coffey of "Ask Mr. Science" "Ask Dr. Science" and Merle Kessler aka "Ian Shoales" . (Hmm, too many redlinks there). --Calton | Talk 04:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well, I'm the biased East Iowan author. As far as I'm concerned, the film is notable enough to be on wikipedia. Not only is it listed on IMDB and other film databases, but the film has a strong following in the eastern Iowa area. I know you might not think much of us, but that's still a whole lot of people. It has an especially strong following at Cornell College where there is a special showing once a year. Also, it was released on VHS and DVD, a feat that a lot of the films I've researched on this website never accomplished. All I ask is that you keep an open mind, the amount of hits it gets on Google doesn't mean it's not notable, it just means more needs to be written on the subject. tmopkisn tlka 05:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The issue is that we don't "write" on the subject. We summarize, paraphrase, compile and quote what others write on the subject. And if by your admission there hasn't been written enough on the movie it simply means could simply mean that it's not encyclopedic by lack of sources. ~ trialsanderrors 08:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Stop quibbling over semantics. "Writing" is exactly what one does, because writing is a very broad topic that covers many areas. Yes, the goal is for that writing to be what one would find in any encyclopedia, but that doesn't mean that you can accost someone because they dared to being slightly non-specific.--SB | T 20:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:AGF I'm not accosting anyone, I'm explaining that the expectation that this article be expanded can only be done if based on good sources. That's what we do, or at least strive to. But I corrected my statement where it could be misinterpreted. In any case, I'm still calling on the editors who vote Keep to actually provide good-sourced material on the movie. The best outcome of an AfD is a better article. ~ trialsanderrors 21:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I find the offered links a bit on the lean side. If I were to write the article using those sources, I wouldn't know what to write. PS It fails my T&E:510 test, even in its own home region. ~ trialsanderrors 08:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Keitei. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per Keitei -- I wouldn't object to a merge when/if the redlinks that Calton points out are filled with articles, but that's not a topic for discussion at this venue or time.--SB | T 20:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Please do not remove the 'sources tag' - only two sentences are sourced. BlueValour 21:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The sources tag has been removed again. There are a number of statements not covered by the references. Removing this tag is unhelpful to a better WP. BlueValour 23:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep The film work of a notable comedy group (why there isn't a Duck's Breath Mystery Theater article is beyond me).  Deletion of Zadar would be akin to asking for removal of a random album from the Firesign Theater discography.  I'm suspecting the failure of the film is confusing the issue: you haven't seen The Day the Clown Cried, either, but it's an interesting work of a notable author. Chris Stangl 00:41, 29 June 2006 (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.