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. Merge / redirect can be discussed on the article's talk page. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 03:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred Hitchcock Masterpiece Collection[edit]

Alfred Hitchcock Masterpiece Collection (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable and trivial. While the individual titles are notable, the packaging and marketing of them as a DVD set is not. Prior precedent with Superman boxsets is towards non-notability. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 18:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This article is padded. Apart from the release date and the films included in the set, the info is unrelated. Star power is pointless trivia and the cameos, while well-known are not related. Info (included in collection) is better mentioned in each separate film article. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As suggested by nom, such box set of DVDs periodically released by production companies is non-notable. And we have other article that lists the works in a much better manner. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 17:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep I notice that G News Archive lists 16 reviews [1] of this specific compilation, (OK, some of them duplicate. but here are still 5 or 6 separate RS reviews) and the selection of films for it aroused considerable published criticism . Does this make it an exception to the usual rule.? DGG (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 22:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The cameos and star power stuff needs trimmed out of the article as irrelevant to the subject, but the reviews found in pretty reliable sources seem to indicate notability. Raven1977 (talk) 22:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• STRONG Keep per WP:ATD as the article can be cleaned up and sourced. Have added several RS sources that might be used. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:55, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to Alfred Hitchcock filmography#Masterpiece Collection where readers might better expect to find informations on Hitchcock and his works. I just took a long look at it and this is where the DVd article truly belongs. The merge will be to a much stronger and more comprehensive article. Erik has made a convert of me. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Alfred Hitchcock filmography#Masterpiece Collection, where I've added some reviews. A stand-alone article about a DVD set has little precedent, especially with nothing but reviews. —Erik (talk • contrib) 22:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Sadly, the sources I had just added were removed by another editor because to read a few of them one had to do a free registration with "Access My Library". I will assume he removed them in good faith. I strongly urge editors at this AfD top assume good faith that they were supportive of notablity of this collection per WP:GNG. Any who think not can easily access them themselves and make that determination for themselves. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The reason they were removed: Wikipedia:External links#Sites requiring registration. The content could actually be implemented into the article body here or at the redirect, where I've already implemented some reviews. —Erik (talk • contrib) 23:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I did not know I could implement the content without being able to then source it... in either this article of your own... as all ecyclopedic content must be verifiable. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: After looking through Access World News, many newspapers do indeed report about this DVD collection with some reviews about its quality. However, the majority of the coverage is about Hitchcock's films in general and touches on each different film in the collection. I did not see anything more than reviews, and I think that a stand-alone article based on nothing but reviews would be severely limited. I've included some reviews at Alfred Hitchcock filmography#Masterpiece Collection, but it is not going to get any more substantial than these kinds of comments found there. —Erik (talk • contrib) 23:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I appreciate that you were able to read the removed sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:41, 30 November 2008 (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.