Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Luna Santin (talk | contribs) at 19:45, 21 December 2007 (moved Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone to [[Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (3). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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: Original research is original research whether in its own article or in a larger one, but apart from Wikipediatrix no-one has really seemed to pay much attention to that, and we have no consensus for deletion. Outcome defaults to keep; AfD does not govern merges, anyone may do that if they feel like it. --Sam Blanning 14:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

With apologies to the large number of Harry Potter fans I fear will descend on this page to vote keep based on their fandom rather than policy, this page fails to be an encyclopedia article and is entirely original research created by a group of fans listing the differences major and minor between the book and its movie adaptation without any analysis. This would be okay on a Harry Potter fansite, but has no encyclopedic value and is merely an indescriminate collection of information in violation of WP:NOT. More specifically, this violates point 7 of WP:NOT by essentially placing two plot summaries side-by-side without meaningful analysis (which would really not be possible on such a topic). Indrian 04:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment, if this gets nominated for deletion, I suggest that the related articles (Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix) should as well--TBCTaLk?!? 04:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I certainly second that. The reason I only nominated one is that I did not want to confuse the issue with an extended series of debates without seeing how the first one turned out. Indrian 15:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all as fancruft and as per nom. Fans encouraged to use Wikia instead Bwithh 04:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete not encyclopedic material. People can deduce this themselves, as Differences between eyes and ears. Somerset219 04:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:OR, unless someone can find a reputable source that describes these differences. -- Koffieyahoo 04:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Into the movie's article. Same for all of the other films.--Ageo020 04:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete all. Cruft, cruft, cruft. A merge might be possible, if such can be done in a non-OR and NPOV way. Morgan Wick 05:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• 'Delete unless extensive citations are provided. Doczilla 07:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with the individual film and/or book articles just like every other book/film conversion Konman72 10:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

• Merge into movie's article per Ageo020. —Ben FrantzDale 12:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge (or expand with critical commentary). Needs context of broader article. Authors should work to add (third-party, sourced) critical commentary to explain significance of these differences. Fairsing 15:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge or Keep, but no Delete. This belongs in the film's article. If it gets too long it may need its own article. Given the wide audience of the book and film, this information should not be deleted outright.  Cdcon  17:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into the film's article per above. BryanG 17:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Pottercruft. Inherently original research, and not important enough for a merge. There's not a movie in existence that doesn't differ from its book counterpart. wikipediatrix 19:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film). Interesting information, but not worth its own article. JIP | Talk 19:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to the film's article. We don't need a separate article on this. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 19:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge, should not be deleted as it is useful information. --musicpvm 22:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into where relevant. Mukadderat 19:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

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.