Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Development hell
Appearance
Endless list of unsourced, non-notable and/or original research. Take your pick really. Only source is a link to a site that has been shutdown by the hosting company MartinDK 12:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - As originial research unless some cites can be found. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral/Keep - Inspiring insider-/backstage-information and personally good entertainment, but I agree the necessarity of the article is not completely relevant. Although I think it should be kept since it is a heavy document and the main author probably spent a lot of valuable time compiling the list. The examples can maybe be left out but the jargon as general should be kept. Karmus (Markus Lund) 13:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I concur except this is blatant listcruft. MartinDK 15:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Development hell is a real phenomenon, it's used as a reference to why so many films don't get made, and Tales from Development Hell is available on Amazon. Also consider these various references: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. DS 17:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Found and added numerous references to the notability of the phenomenon from Variety, the New York Times, and other mainstream sources. Mosy books or screenplays purchased do not become films, and some languish for 50 years. Edit boldly to remove randomly listed films and other works which do not have cites or which do not clarify and exemplify the concept and make the article encyclopedic, or which lack citations and are original research. Edison 18:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Excellent. Sometimes the only way to salvage an article is to bring it here. The term itself is notable and easy to verify but the list needs cleaning up because when I nominated it it was orphaned listcruft of dubious value beyond the definition of the term itself. MartinDK 20:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep this is a notable term and passes WP:Notability Valoem talk 19:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)