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 withdraw as concerns were successfully addressed. (non-admin closure) Jean Stair (talk) 06:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

M Cream

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Regards its subject only with superlatives. Needs fundamental rewrite. Was PRODed before. Jean Stair (talk) 06:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I said when I contested the WP:PROD deletion, a fundamental rewrite doesn't require an admin to hit the "delete" button first. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to see the alternative being carried out over this talk. Best, Jean Stair (talk) 08:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I have already removed the promotional material from this article. The references are all legitimate and well referenced. Please let me know what 'superlatives' you are objecting to :@Jean Stair:? As far as I can tell, the article is written objectively and cites the accomplishments of the film. The article should be retained. I have further improved the Development section by removing some 'promotional language' albeit a very minor example as I can find no other promotional language in the article. Have checked all sections and rephrased where needed. Best, FilmForum61 (talk) 17:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Have improved the reception section by adding mixed reviews and opposing sentiments to bring greater balance to the page. Please check :@Jean Stair: - I think the AfD prop can be removed if you think the updates are satisfactory. Best, FilmForum61 (talk) 17:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thank you, FilmForum61 for editing the page and not just engaging in rambling like some guardians of certain articles tend to do. It looks neutral now. Thanks, Jean Stair (talk) 06:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Stair, you seem to be under the impression that there is some kind of "edit on demand" service at Wikipedia. Articles are written by volunteers, so the only way that you can be sure of getting an article rewritten is to do it yourself. This venue is for deciding whether it would be possible to write a policy-compliant article about a subject, not for demanding that someone else does so. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to put this out for you, but your opening statement and this last one contradict each other. Jean Stair (talk)

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.