Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slating procedure
- 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 transwiki to Wikibooks. --Sam Blanning(talk) 23:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How-to guide; suggest a transwiki to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Movie_Making_Manual Girolamo Savonarola 00:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Transwiki - Per above. Kushboy 04:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- don't see why this article should be deleted. No reason is given. Can we be rational about this please and explain the reasons for deletion please. It's useful information for anyone interested in filmmaking. Include it in transwiki but I don't know anything about that anyway. This article is for the Wikipedia and forms part of the content for the filmmaking article. Egrabczewski 1 Jun 2006. [copied from talk page by Girolamo Savonarola]
- Useful information it may indeed be, but it simply does not meet the criteria currently in place regarding article entries. Specifically, point 8 of "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" - what has been created is an instruction manual (and one that is in fact only correct for one very specific subset of filmmaking practiced in one region). This information is indeed useful - however, its place is not in an encyclopedia but a wikibook; specifically the one I've cited above. As with the AfD nom on roll number, I would like to suggest that perhaps you read WP:NOT briefly, in order that your work is as productive as it is useful. I've also had to redirect several other articles you created because we already had other articles on the topics, or because the subject was so much of a subset of another article that it didn't require a separate article (which was also composed of paragraphs you cut, not copied, from the original articles). I think that overall your work is good and certainly has a place in either the Wikipedia or other wiki projects, depending on the content, and I don't want to discourage you in your efforts! However, I'd just advise more caution and familiarity with the editing policies. Girolamo Savonarola 20:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I sincerely feel that this article is extremely useful for someone that is involved with & wants to understand this particular process (such as myself). It details step-by-step, a process about which it might be difficult to find information elsewhere.It has helped me greatly and I'm sure it will continue to be useful to others as well. Just because it does not match certain criteria set by Wikipedia isn't a good enough reason to deny someone this information. Infact, this article shlould be expanded to include other example and terminology.
~ Oceanstar
- Transwiki to Wikibooks. Good content, simply the wrong place. Stifle (talk) 14:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Transwiki per Stifle. --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 12:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Transwiki --Runcorn 16:40, 3 June 2006 (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.