This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WarthogDemon (talk | contribs) at 20:10, 26 July 2007 (not quite my point). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:10, 26 July 2007 by WarthogDemon (talk | contribs) (not quite my point)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Zeitgeist
(Copied from User talk:DESiegel):
Why did you delete the talk page of Zeitgeist the movie? --Trekerboy
- Because the page Zeitgeist the movie had already been deleted, and after a look at it I saw no reason to challenge that deletion. Therefore WP:CSD#G8 (talk pages of nonexistent or deleted pages) applied. If we are not going to have an article Zeitgeist the movie, there is no good reason to have Talk:Zeitgeist the movie. If you think that Zeitgeist the movie was deleted improperly, take it up with the deleting admin, or got to deletion review. i don't think that many will agree with you, but i could be wrong, i have been before. DES 18:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
If you don't agree with the deletion of Zeitgeist the Movie please bring it up at deletion review as DES suggested. Don't make complaints on other articles as you did at Zeitgeist (disambiguation) - it looks like disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point and could be regarded as vandalism. Iain99 18:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for the information. I have already done as you suggested (multiple times). But thanks for the information, I will reform my entry on the page to make it meet up with wikipedia standards. --Trekerboy 18:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
The deleted article was rescued and moved to Wikia, http://www.wikia.com/c:Filmguide:Zeitgeist , so can you put out the word to the Zeitgeist warriors, so they can stop trying to slip it into Misplaced Pages? It has been deemed inappropriate for WP, but it is welcome on Wikia. - Crockspot 19:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Zeitgeist warriors? I have no idea who they would be, but if you know of such a community please let me know, I'd love to connect with some of them. Crockspot, I have been inquiring all over wikipedia why this article was "deemed inappropriate for WP". The reasons cited, such as "not notable" and "It is an article about a web site, blog, online forum, webcomic, podcast, or similar web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. (CSD A7)" are completely untrue. The notability of this documentary is clear if by nothing else the deletion review discussion . Further, to say that the article is about a web site, blog, online forum, webcomic, podcast, or similar web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject suggests that the person who deleted the article didn't even know that it was/is a full length documentary. The article was not about a a web site, blog, online forum, webcomic, podcast, or similar web content, it was about a documentary. I feel very strongly that this article is being censored which is EXACTLY what wikipedia is supposed to be against. --Trekerboy 19:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Google videos hardly reach the requirements of "notable documentaries." -WarthogDemon 19:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the first time I saw this movie it was being presented at the University of Michigan. Additionally, I also have a DVD of the documentary, so I continue to assert that this article is at the very least "notable". --Trekerboy 19:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just because it's on dvd doesn't mean it's notable. I have a dvd of my friend's pictures of his daughter. Does that mean that deserves an article too? -WarthogDemon 19:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Definition of notable just so we are on the same page . Further, if your DVD of your friend's daughter have a deletion review more than 20,000 words long, then yes, I would argue that it is notable. Also, I highly doubt that the DVD of your friend's daughter has any original content and new ideas, but if it did and a lot of people were interested in it, then yes, it would be notable. --Trekerboy 19:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- The definition of notable per Misplaced Pages is to be found on Misplaced Pages:Notability, specifically Misplaced Pages:Notability (films) and/or Misplaced Pages:Notability (web). The Zeitgeist article was deleted according to those policies, because nobody made a coherent case as to how it satisfied them. If Misplaced Pages did censor internet 9/11 conspiracy films, this article would have been censored too. It wasn't: it's a question of notability and reliable sources rather than content. Iain99 20:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Furthermore, Trekerboy, you missed my point. I was saying that anyone could make a documentary of something (amateur, professional, or otherwise), put it on a dvd, and say it's notable. -WarthogDemon 20:10, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Definition of notable just so we are on the same page . Further, if your DVD of your friend's daughter have a deletion review more than 20,000 words long, then yes, I would argue that it is notable. Also, I highly doubt that the DVD of your friend's daughter has any original content and new ideas, but if it did and a lot of people were interested in it, then yes, it would be notable. --Trekerboy 19:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just because it's on dvd doesn't mean it's notable. I have a dvd of my friend's pictures of his daughter. Does that mean that deserves an article too? -WarthogDemon 19:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the first time I saw this movie it was being presented at the University of Michigan. Additionally, I also have a DVD of the documentary, so I continue to assert that this article is at the very least "notable". --Trekerboy 19:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- Google videos hardly reach the requirements of "notable documentaries." -WarthogDemon 19:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)