Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of movies that take place in one day or less

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, no consensus to move to category. Daniel 08:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of movies that take place in one day or less

Indiscriminate list of films who share only this trivial fact. Almost totally dependent on original research. Still more listcruft. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to category This is probably something that can service better as a category. Yngvarr (t) (c) 18:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to delete going with majority so that it can be closed and done with. Yngvarr (t) (c) 10:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move to category Agree--this is one case where a category makes more sense. DGG (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move to category. I don't care if the list article stays or goes, but save us the trouble of a CFD. This is exactly the type of thing that makes a lousy category—it's a trivial feature of the article's subject, not a defining fact, and the films that share this trait likely have nothing else in particular in common. Furthermore, if it's OR in list form, how much more valid is it going to be when it's an uncited, unelaborated category tag slapped at the bottom of an article? Postdlf 18:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom / oppose move per Postdlf. - superβεεcat 18:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Depends on WP:OR either way. shoy 19:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Original research and it would never be complete. I thought of at least 3 movies off the top of my head that weren't on that list. But to add them, I'd have to find a source that says it only took place in one day. Please delete this listcruft. --SGT Tex 20:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can't bring myself to vote delete or keep. Somewhat interesting bit of trivia, but that seems to be all it is at the moment. Many suspense thrillers take place in the span of less than 24 hours so as not to break the suspense; then there are the "day in the life" type like Ferris Bueller. BTW, Three O'Clock High had an aftermath that took place the day after. Mandsford 21:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Does it define "day" by a 24-hour period, or by a calendar day? I'm not sure that's clear. Postdlf 02:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's another problem I have with the concept. Once you get into an arbitrary cutoff point for what's on the list and what's not, it's pure trivia. Producers and directors will sometimes look for a plot that represents a day's worth of story, but rarely does anyone let a time limit get in the way of presenting the film. I doubt that Alfred Hitchcock gave it a second thought when he did Psycho. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandsford (talk • contribs) 22:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with Mandsford, it seems like a great piece of trivia, but I think it serves as original research as these movies are not particularly notable for the fact that they take place in 24 hours.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 02:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am most convinced by the arguments to make this a category than anything else, unless if it can be kept as a better referenced article. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 04:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article / Weak oppose move to category. List has major problems with WP:NOT#IINFO /WP:TRIVIA and WP:OR, and a new category wouldn't help with that. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and oppose categorisation. Bad on so many levels (probably unverifiable, loosely associated, or, the list goes on). Categorisation is pointless as the same problems still arise. Bad bad bad. AllynJ (talk | contribs) 09:03, 26 September 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.