Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 in home video

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. Sandstein 10:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 in home video (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Although there are articles for years in home video dating back as 1971, I'm using this AfD a precendent before nominating any others. I have serious doubts about years of releases on home video (or DVD, blue ray or other media) being a notable topic ... as generally it would be considered more notable to include the year the production was first published. Of all 1004 sources on the article - every single source (I am yet to see any different) links to Amazon, an online shopping website - giving a look at some of the Amazon links they don't even specify the release date .. neither do a significant number of the Wikipedia articles of many of the titles. To top this off, the list has been mostly populated by IP users. In the end - fails WP:NOR WP:NOTCATALOGUE WP:NOTLINKFARM and WP:LISTN Ajf773 (talk) 08:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep: Given the references provided, this list passes WP:V. Given the scope of the list, it passes WP:LISTN via the much-higher standard WP:CSC. So this nomination is entirely based on WP:NOT, and this is not a sales catalogue because it does not include pricing or availability information – the latter considering that in theory the Amazon citations could be replaced with any other vendors', and much like with notability the current state of the article has zero bearing on whether it should be deleted or not. Modernponderer (talk) 13:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Notability is questionable as there's no real importance as to when a film or television series was released on any sort of media. The references are almost unanimously linked to an online shopping site. They are not suitable sources for that reason, and not 100% reliable either. Ajf773 (talk) 18:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• It is not just release dates in the article. Home media information is actually considered quite important, as the level of detail at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Television#Home media and streaming services can readily attest. As for the rest of your comment, I repeat: "the current state of the article has zero bearing on whether it should be deleted or not". Modernponderer (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I would suspect that the articles about earlier years (e.g., 1971 in home video) are more justifiable. When you go back that far, you get into the "firsts", the releases which could have historical significance for shaping the home-video market. Long ago, in the Before Times, the fact that a movie was released on home video was actually an event. Now, not so much. I would expect that any "Year N in home video" article would be about the history of the industry — when a new format was introduced, when a company imploded, etc. For example, "2018 in home video" could mention that eight of the nine remaining Blockbusters in the United States closed down, a development that had plenty of news coverage. This article ... isn't that. XOR'easter (talk) 17:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I started an "events" section that might, in principle, be the basis of a keep-able page. XOR'easter (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a WP:SOFIXIT issue that merely requires the heavy discouragement of shopping sites as sources, not wholesale deletion. WP:FILM and WP:WPMEDIA mentions on those talk pages are appropriate. But per XOR, these articles should be less a bizarro time-shifted 2018 in film article with dates shifted three months and actually describe events in the industry. Nate • (chatter) 01:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • My inclination would be that any release date that can only be sourced to shopping sites is not worth including. But there are special cases where the release of a film on home video is still worth mentioning: when a formerly lost film is recovered or reconstructed and made available for the first time, for example. Our page 2010 in home video doesn't mention the reconstruction of Metropolis, but it should — that's actually a bit of film history. (So too, for different reasons, is Manos: The Hands of Fate, a restoration of which was released in 2015.) The original cut of Godzilla didn't come out in the US until 2006, I think, which is another type of event that deserves a bullet point in a timeline. A film becoming available because a ban of some kind was lifted is also noteworthy, e.g., A Clockwork Orange finally becoming available in the UK. These are the sorts of releases that media sources actually cover, so we have sources that aren't shopping sites. XOR'easter (talk) 15:45, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep these category of lists are a notable subject even if current refs may be unreliable and they can be improved as detailed above, no valid reason for deletion Atlantic306 (talk) 15:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• There are no categories for film or television or other media being released on home video/DVD/blue-ray by year. The list of releases is simply a catalogue and linkfarm for online shopping and offers little in the way of encyclopedic content, other than what XOR'easter has added. Ajf773 (talk) 04:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep because this is actually interesting and useful information for countless reasons. Not everyone has access to theaters showing movies the day they come out so this is much more useful information about when a movie will be more readily accessible to a larger audience. Furthermore, despite the claims by XOR'easter, these pages actually do include information about when new video formats are released. All you have to do is look at the pages relating to those years. The mere fact that there have not been any new video formats in 2018 does not mean that that information will not be included in pages for previous or future years. --Nicholas0 (talk) 00:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:USEFUL is not a good argument for retention of an article or content. Ajf773 (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Furthermore, despite the claims by XOR'easter, these pages actually do include information about when new video formats are released. Yes, for example, 1971 in home video to which I linked mentions the introduction of U-matic. I wasn't discussing the pages for prior years, just the one for 2018 that is being debated now. XOR'easter (talk) 17:11, 10 December 2018 (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.