Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apocalypse Trilogy

: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. Clear consensus that this is original research and does not belong anywhere in the encyclopedia. Material will thus be deleted, but there's no prohibition against User:Erik or anyone else recreating as a redirect to John Carpenter. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 05:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

=[[Apocalypse Trilogy]]=

:{{la|Apocalypse Trilogy}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apocalypse Trilogy}}|2=AfD statistics}})

:({{findsources|Apocalypse Trilogy}})

Article reads like an essay, and would appear to be mainly original research. If all the apparent OR is removed, there's nothing left in the article. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete. This article is a violation of WP:OR, existing information is used to produce a synthesis that advances a new position. Should reliable third party sources exist that discuss the actual trilogy (not each individual film), then these can be used to create an appropriate article. Currently, I'm unable to find any such published materials. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 17:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Redirect to John Carpenter. The term does [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22apocalypse+trilogy%22+%22john+carpenter%22 exist] but I do not believe that any description of this grouping warrants a stand-alone article. "Apocalypse Trilogy" is actually already mentioned at the John Carpenter article, and its context can be expanded there. The "Connections" section is particularly inappropriate as it is original research. Erik (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2010 (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.