Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moving image formats

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. ^Complex/_Rational 16:14, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moving image formats

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. My original rationale was: This is an essay based on original research, and cannot be rewritten into an an encyclopedic article. If someone wants to write an encyclopedic article on "Moving image formats" (which would be a WP:BCA, not a personal essay reflecting on the topic), this should be deleted and a new article written. There is nothing in the page history of this uncited personal reflection on moving image formats that is worth saving. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Technology. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE, lacks context. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- I'd say keep a stub, but given this would be a broad-concept article it would probably not be helpful that way. Mrfoogles (talk) 22:56, 30 November 2024 (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.