Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Final cut privilege

: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. Non-admin closure. Jujutacular T · C 03:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

=[[Final cut privilege]]=

:{{la|Final cut privilege}} ([{{fullurl:Final cut privilege|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Final cut privilege}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Aside from not citing a single source, it's a definition of an industry term and probably belongs in an dictionary, not an encyclopedia. CarbonX (talk) 11:44, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep - The article is far more than a dictionary definition and could be expanded further, such as by going into more detail on how various directors achieved the priviledge, how it's been used, how it has been taken away (e.g., Orson Welles after Citizen Kane, resulting in the travesty that is the current version of The Magnificent Ambersons. The article needs more sourcing, but sources are available - e.g., the Orson Welles issue has been covered in many books about Welles (and as a bonus, some discuss the similar issues around Touch of Evil). Rlendog (talk) 21:35, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

:Delete as unnecessary dictionary definition. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

::Why do you say this is a "dictionary definition"? There is far more in the article than a mere definition. Rlendog (talk) 16:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep: but expand - Ret.Prof (talk) 22:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - This nomination seems to have been open for more than 6 months, and there is no deletion notice on the article (and, per the history, after a prod was removed, there never was). It seems like time to close this. I would, but I have participated in the discussion. Rlendog (talk) 20:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep. Seems to be a sourced, established concept. Is more than a dictionary definition. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:28, 26 February 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.