Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doomsday Called Off

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. -Doc^g 14:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doomsday Called Off (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable; no useful text (e.g. contributors unnamed, arguments not given) William M. Connolley 19:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I found at least a couple of independent reviews from reliable sources, but the article is clearly a stub and it should be annotated with citations. Also, FWIW, this topic (global warming) is somewhat contentious - I suggest we error on the side of caution to make sure all sides of the debate are heard from. Ronnotel 20:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Please provide those sources and prove Bill wrong, if you wouldn't mind. Someguy1221 07:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - You can watch it online at Google Video. It's not a particularly good documentary, IMO, but I can't see any reason not to keep the article. It could easily be expanded to present the points that are mentioned in the movie. Bueller 007 05:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no prejudice against the topic, but we have no sources establishing notability of this particular program. Wikipedia is not a directory of argumentation in debates. --Dhartung | Talk 05:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for lack of assertion of notability, the only possible assertion is propaganda from the station that aired it. Someguy1221 07:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 883,000 google hits says this is a bad faith nom--RCT 21:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  883k google hits says you forgot to put quotes around it. If you can find any notable reviews of it, please put them onto the article page William M. Connolley 21:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom; no assertion of notability. Guettarda 05:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above, no notability Vsmith 11:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom: garbagey. --BozMo talk 11:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - It is said that it's "Non-notable; no useful text (e.g. contributors unnamed, arguments not given)." But articles on the movies, Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure and Transylvania 6-5000 currently are not being considered for deletion from Wikipedia. Why, because those are notable or useful? A Google search on the title of the film in question yields hundreds if not thousands of hits. Most anyone versed in the prolific debate on global warming has an opinion on the film. Why not allow the next newcomer to that debate begin to form his or her own opinion here? --Contontos 02:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)— Contontos (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Someguy1221 07:01, 17 May 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.