Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Masters of Cinema releases (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Masters of Cinema. There is consensus to not keep this, but disagreement as to whether a merger is appropriate. The redirection is a compromise that allows subsequent editorial consensus to determine what, if any, content should be merged from history. Sandstein 08:59, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Masters of Cinema releases (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)

WP:INDISCRIMINATE; WP:NOTCATALOG. See multiple other similar discussions: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Magnetic Video releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Arrow Films releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Artisan Entertainment video releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Twilight Time releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Powerhouse Films releases; Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of BBC home video releases, etc, etc. --woodensuperman 12:31, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CoolSkittle (talk) 12:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CoolSkittle (talk) 12:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CoolSkittle (talk) 12:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Indiscriminate, no WP:LISTN. FOARP (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTCATALOGUE. Ajf773 (talk) 21:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I can, and have in the past, argued that this is not a non-notable list. Holsheimer (talk) 11:04, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• How does sourcing from Amazon and Blu-Ray help making this notable? Ajf773 (talk) 19:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• In the main article there are sources about the notability of the collection as a whole. They are lacking here, but as I understand WP:LISTN states that the list as a whole should be notable not individual items. Holsheimer (talk) 12:57, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The line itself is notable, the WP:CATALOGUE of every single release is not. --woodensuperman 12:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's a notable collection. As a cinephile, collector and member of the online cine-phile community I refer to this page frequently for both current and historic information because the Masters of Cinema series is the most prestigious in the UK by a mile. The idea that the list is not notable is risible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.128.41 (talk) 14:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a valid split from a clearly notable parent article that shows that the list topic is notable with coverage in reliable sources. No valid reason for deletion except WP:IDONTLIKEIT Atlantic306 (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge to Masters of Cinema. I'm not seeing anything that suggests that MoC is anywhere close to the stature of the Criterion Collection. In any case, the MoC article is so short, the list could be moved there. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I am inclined to agree with WP:NOTCATALOG, I could understand these titles being grouped in a category together, I am not sure I see the point of this list beyond being a catalog. Govvy (talk) 12:39, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Masters of Cinema. The films released are obviously relevant to a discussion of the label/brand. --Michig (talk) 07:34, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Masters of Cinema, and collapse table by default. I hatnoted Masters of Cinema for refimprove, yet right now, if that one was under discussion, I'd vote weak delete. Despite the visible love here of cinephiles, there's no mainstream coverage of the label - they only get brief mentions when they release films. Apparently the Masters of Cinema group (and with it the line) was bought by Eureka Entertainment. Nine pages of a targeted Google search for "Eureka Entertainment" also turns up not a single in-depth profile of the company - just name drops with the announcements of movies they released. This almost seems like a classic case of notability not being inherited, unless someone can convincingly argue or find a carve-out in WP:GNG. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:36, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Masters of Cinema – I am unsure if the content is really worth merging but I have no prejudice against a merge. ––Redditaddict69 ^{(talk) (contribs)} 05:37, 10 January 2019 (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.