- 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 keep. NYC Guru (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- List of vampire films (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Impossibly broad in scope; would be much better off as a category tree. Currently contains hundreds of entries and is sourced mostly to IMDB and other sources of user-generated content. Many entries in the "notes" column are copied verbatim from IMDB descriptions. Prose at the beginning of each section is mostly WP:SYNTH. — SamX [talk · contribs] 05:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 05:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The list has primary sources, mostly to IMDb and user-generated websites, which are not accepted. It is also too broad. This list is better off as a category. There is no reason for this list to exist. FlutterDash344 (talk) 06:33, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Nothing about this is especially broad, and having IMDb sources is not a reason for deletion.★Trekker (talk) 07:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep. The guideline says: "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources". Here I don't think that it is reasonable to say it hasn't. (But to be on the safe side, see this or this, for example) On top of that, a list can help organizing the films, for example chronologically, which a category can't. Note that there is also List of vampire television series. As for sourcing, required clean up and prose, it is another issue, as StarTrekker explained. And I too do not think it is "impossibly" broad. And if this is a real concern, let's split it in 1895-1950; 1951-2024, or by regions. But again, this is not the issue here.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Mushy. There is notability about this list's existence, especially in terms of ranking. IGN, IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, Buzzfeed, Reader's Digest, etc. However, the article needs some work for sure. Conyo14 (talk) 16:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep passes WP:NLIST, not seeing a valid deletion reason, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per NLIST. I've removed some unnotable films (i.e. lacking articles) and miniseries. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:50, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or Split. Article has no context. Why does one need to know every vampire film? What knowledge is grasped? This list is horribly maintained, implying there is some Nosferatu series, it includes material such as production countries, year of release that are not backed up by their sources, has poor quality sources. Now the topic is also far too broad. If anything like this could be maintained, i'd cut it down by decades or even a century. What is the limit on this? Is a vampire film any film that has a vampire in once? the article "Vampire film" itself states it is a genre, but then just lists random vampire films with no context to its history or if anyone considers it a genre. Too broad of meaning until some rules can be established, and this article is going to get worse before "saving" what junk we have makes it any better. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It's useful research to scholars and the public and what are you going to do, delete all film lists on Wikipedia? 5Q5|✉ 09:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:LC items 2, 5, and 9. Stifle (talk) 08:55, 6 September 2023 (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.