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 no consensus. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 10:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skyscrapers in film[edit]

Skyscrapers in film (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete - Wikipedia is not a repository of loosely-associated topics. That a skyscraper appears in a film is not sufficient to justify this article. Otto4711 03:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film and TV-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 00:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 00:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Loose association. Could be categorised if required for movies that are based around sky scrappers.--Dacium 06:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete yet another "List of films with/featuring/involving/by whatever" that amounts to an indiscriminate list. A list of movies about skyscrapers? Maybe. But this? No. Arkyan 18:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and source. If the intro sentences are sourced, they would form the basis for a stub-class article on "Skyscrapers in film". -- Black Falcon 22:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:SUMMARY. There is a precedent for splitting off sections into subarticles that go into detail on various aspects of a topic. Pop culture is always something lots of people are interested in, and these subarticles are helpful for managing such information. The main article on skyscrapers is a bit of a mess, but it would only get worse if pop culture is all dumpted into the main article and not split off. --Aude (talk) 23:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:SUMMARY is a guideline, not a policy. Otto4711 04:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Like most of these lists listed for deletion, they need expansion and cleanup. Each film clearly has explanation of the impact of skyscraper in the film, which for some of these films, the skyscraper is one of the most important parts of the film. With more dedicated efforts, the article could continue to include more entries and more details to improve its quality. --Nehrams2020 05:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Nehrams2020. Maintenance/cleanup will be needed to keep this list clear of background details. Hoverfish Talk 09:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Nehrams2020; this article is encyclopedic and seems to have been caught up in a major purge. Hopefully, the closing admin will pay attention. Carlossuarez46 06:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete per reason given in nomination. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 18:36, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per WP:LIST: information and navigation. Featuring Skyscrapers is sufficient commonality. - Peregrine Fisher 02:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - there are fun lists yes and I wouldn't mind scanning through them on a movie trivia site, but having this type of information on wikipedia is totally unnecessary and in my opinion, making the encyclopedia appear less professional. Usedup 01:10, 1 March 2007 (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.