Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Place for Paedophiles

A Place for Paedophiles

A Place for Paedophiles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Tiny article (two lines) about a noted documentary artists' much less known documentary. No encylcopedic value, as Wikipedia is not the TV guide. Would not be opposed to a merge with Louis Theroux and/or Coalinga State Hospital, although there is only two lines of content here, so there is little to actually merge. Would object to redirect to Coalinga State Hospital if merge is rejected. Would not be opposed to a redirect to Louis Theroux if merge is rejected. Sven Manguard _Talk 16:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

• Note: Subject is also covered adequately at Louis Theroux's BBC 2 Specials. Content is mostly the same. Would not object to merge or redirect to that page either. Sven Manguard _Talk 16:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

• Keep overwhelming reliable sources to verify notability and this article needs further expansion clearly. Dwanyewest (talk) 19:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I find it amazing that before the AfD there was two sources and one line of text, and afterwards, there are eight sources and an additional hefty paragraph. Please actually state that you have begun working on the article in an effort to save it. By not mentioning it, it undermines the credibility of me, the submitter, anyone (in this case no one) who had already voted, and the AfD process itself. I am overwhelmingly happy that you have decided to improve the article. I am unhappy that you did not extend us the courtesy to mention that fact. In light of this, Motion to suspend AfD proceedings for 48 hours on the grounds that the article creator is working on improving the article to save it. Sven Manguard _Talk 20:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

AFD is not for deleting stubs or short articles. AFD is for deleting unworthy subjects. Dream Focus 01:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Motion denied - Objection, your honor! Sustained. Note that AfD's run for 7 days. You have until October 11 to improve the article. If you make any more motions, I will find you in contempt of court. You do have the option of withdrawing your nomination, however, since there have not been any delete votes yet. SnottyWong ^converse 00:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Withdrawn Creator has demonstrated the indecency to make changes to the article without informing AfD and acting like the changes were always there. I am done extending kindness to him. If he is going to try to go it alone without bringing the community in the loop, even after politely being asked to, I see no reason to extend him further assistance. Sad, but it is his choice. Sven Manguard _Talk 03:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron. SnottyWong ^soliloquize 00:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
• Keep Click the Google news search at the top of the AFD, and you get ample coverage. The first is a review from the Times. [1]. Dream Focus 01:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Note I would like to point out that just because something appeared on TV does not automatically make it notable. In this case the sources he added are reviews (acceptable occasionally) and TV Guide like sites that announce the broadcast and nothing else (not acceptable). I still think that the best solution is the page Louis Theroux's BBC 2 Specials. Sven Manguard _Talk 03:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)