Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fast Food Video

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus. Article defaults to "keep". Joyous 02:30, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Fast Food Video[edit]

Juvenille POV nonsense. Sc147 01:22, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Delete nonsense. Gazpacho 02:44, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Looks like nonsense to me... Delete unless verified. If verified, move to appropriate title and clean up. --L33tminion | (talk) 07:29, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
- And don't bite. --L33tminion | (talk) 07:30, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
~~Move to BJAODN~~. Grue 10:42, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Now that it's not funny, just delete. Grue 12:46, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep I will say one thing for sure, it's NOT a hoax. Supporting information here: http://media.erdc.k12.mn.us/htbin/wwform/237?TEXT=R13123415-13126763-/CA/WWI770.HTM and also here http://www.yhssa.org/Library/Library.asp?action=View&Category=Video/CD&Subject=16&r=2 (scroll down to the 3rd entry). The article even got the year right. My guess is some kid saw this in school and decided to write an encyclopedia article on it. Needs a little cleanup, but it's certainly a real film, and more or less as the article describes. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:46, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
Weak keep. I moved it to the actual title of the video Fast Foods and a bit of edit. Gtabary 18:46, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Weak delete. Having an entry for every single film ever made is one thing, but every video, no matter how minor? How about those old film strips we used to watch in elementary school, where someone would have to turn to the next projected picture whenever the tape went "beep"? Is an article on "The Four Food Groups and You! Sponsored by Nutriplex Corp" next? -R. fiend 20:22, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I'd like to think so. Information on "little" films like this are important to film buffs, as many of the actors and filmmakers involved with them are also involved in other, more important projects. Herk Harvey, the director of the famous classic horror film Carnival of Souls, directed more than 400 industrial films in his career. Walt Disney, perhaps the greatest (and almost certainly most famous) filmmaker in history, produced hundreds of educational short films... in fact, his last production credit before his death is a short safety film with Jiminey Cricket about the dangers of electricity, entitled "I'm No Fool with Electricity". Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 22:05, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)
  - Great, but are all 400 of those industrial films encyclopedic? Are we going to have articles on them? Just because Disney made some film on "the correct procdures for using a mitre saw" doesn't mean it's anything more than a very small footnote to Walt Disney. Besides, this video, in particular, seems to have no one of any note connected with it. If IMDb can't be bothered with this one (and they are directed entirely to film buffs) then I don't see why we should be. -R. fiend 22:29, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    - In a theoretical perfect Wikipedia, they would all have articles. To leave out the majority of the work of such an important filmmaker would be unencyclopedic in itself, and to try to cram them all onto the Disney page would make it huge. Plus, there's the fact that films are almost never the work of just one person, so to put films in personal bio articles is a discredit to the others who worked on them. As for our current subject, the links I posted above say that it was made by Learning Seed, a company which is still around, and its website states that they use actors whom the viewer "might recognize some from television or commercials". So there's a reasonable chance that one or more of those connected with it have gone on to other things. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:15, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
    - I completely disagree. The fact that Disney produced 400 industrial training films is interesting and deserves mentioning in the article on him. If any of the individual films is notable, there should be an article on it. For example, perhaps it was a training film where some animation technique, or character, etc, was introduced for the first time. Apart from that, it would be a bad thing to add 400 articles to the Wikipedia for the films. If by some strange turn of events, some film scholoar is writing his Ph.D. dissertation on Disney's training films, he isn't going to be using the Wikipedia as his source, anyway, and who else, even a film buff, could possibly be interested in each individual film. --BM 19:02, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Weak Delete. The only thing I could see is to lump it in with the movie Supersize Me on a criticisms of fast food page. Other than that, it doesn't pull enough weight to be out there alone. --Woohookitty 21:05, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Agree. Would be the best. Gtabary 12:33, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup A video apparently shown to (I presume) thousands of kids seems notable enough, especially if at least one of them could remember details 13 years later --Dtcdthingy 02:35, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Weak Keep, needs cleanup and expansion. Megan1967 02:57, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Wrong side of the line. Wile E. Heresiarch 07:53, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep (or weak merge). This possibly falls under several of the "Problems that don't require deletion" in the Deletion policy. It's apparently verifiable, but needs improvement and others. However, if we're arguing that it's "Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article", the policy says to merge. I agree with varying degrees with either of those decisions. --Sketchee 08:26, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.