Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salvation Army filmography

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. Sandstein (talk) 06:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Salvation Army filmography

The information in this list is just too trivial. Garion96 (talk) 21:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unsourced and indiscriminate info on every time that the Salvation Army's appeared in a movie. It would be very hard to verify every listing, not to mention that this is a directory of loosely associated topics. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 21:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the Hammer, or his otters...never sure who's talking LegoTech·(t)·(c) 23:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep A genuinely interesting and unusual encyclopedic article. The lack of sources will probably kill it, sadly. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per every reason given above.

Comment: Why wasn't this article proposed for deletion when it initially was created by Rhyddfrydol more than two years ago? It certainly would have saved him/her - as its major contributor - a lot of time and effort. However, as much as I hate to see someone's hard work deleted, too much of this article - such as American Gigolo (1980) Richard Gere's character gets an appeal letter from the Salvation Army - amounts to nothing more than trivia and hardly constitutes "Salvation Army filmography," which should be limited to films in which a major focus is placed on the organization. MovieMadness (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response You may be surprised how many old articles are lying around in WP:Backlog that should have been deleted years ago! Ecoleetage (talk) 15:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep/Move~~ Delete in present form

Comment: Indeed this article is very extensive and as a whole would not be found elsewhere, despite lacking sources it HAS merit. It may not qualify as a WP: filmography, it certainly can be counted among the many 'Lists of Films' WP supports. I think it should be recreated as a list. Wikipedia has many many films lists which are not as extensive as this one. If WP can handle List of films about computers and List of biker films it can keep this one. EraserGirl (talk) 15:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: At a glance, it appears in the List of films about computers and List of biker films, the movies truly are about the subject matter. As I stated above, the major problem with this article is that most of the film's cited are not about the Salvation Army but rather merely make mention of it or refer to it in a vague or trivial way. If it was limited to films in which a major focus is placed on the organization, I would vote to keep it, although it would be a very short article indeed. MovieMadness (talk) 16:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I concede your point, the subject is only tangential in many cases. Perhaps curtailing it to ones where the Salvation Army is a major element would improve the article and bring it to a more acceptable form. The author of the article should keep his research, perhaps in his own sandbox with those intentions. I will change my vote for that reason, the research should be put to better use, but the article as it stands does not conform. EraserGirl (talk) 17:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per TenPoundHammer. It's basically a "list of films that at least vaguely refer to the Salvation Army", which is far, far too broad. Also, it's unsourced, and much of it is sure to be unsourceable. Jakew (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.