Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of upcoming films

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. Tim Song (talk) 04:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of upcoming films

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

The title is pretty much self-explanatory. In contesting the prod the creator stated that this is a repository of films once included in 2011 and beyond in film. That's where it belongs. There are numerous precedents for deleting time-sensitive lists such as this one, in favor of static timeless lists like 2011 and beyond in film, which can be renamed at the end of 2011. Delete. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The content of this article was once on the 2011 and beyond in film article. Across Wikipedia, there are various mentions of upcoming films, including sequels and remakes, without their own articles or mentions within a list of films article. A simple list noting some information as well as references would bring about organization of such mentions of films, rather than just keeping this information scattered across numerous articles on Wikipedia. — AMK152 ^{(t • c)} 00:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't noticed a prod was added but I had a feeling this would be brought to AfD as soon as I saw its title hit new pages. I don't suppose there are any magic words or code (or magic word and code) combinations that we can use that will redirect anyone who searches for this article to the appropriate 2010 in film or 2011 and beyond in film articles depending on the year? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 01:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wow this is sad. It is a good list, and would be very useful to lots of people. But WP is supposed to be about articles of lasting value and this list will change every week as the movies are released and removed from the list. You might as well have an article on "Next week's weather predictions for major cities." Kitfoxxe (talk) 05:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Wikipedia is neither a crystal ball nor a news source. The list is unmaintainable (which may or may not be a valid deletion reason), has potentially infinite scope (which is a deletion criterion per WP:SALAT), and is simply not encyclopedic content. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious delete. Oh boy. — Timneu22 · talk 12:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, uncompletable and redundant to 2011 and beyond in film. Hairhorn (talk) 19:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NOTDIR--137.122.49.102 (talk) 21:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any new sourced content back to 2011 and beyond in film, as even the nominator grants that that is where it belongs. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, hopeless WP:CRYSTAL failure. Not opposed to merging per MQS. Stifle (talk) 09:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back any relevant sourced material to the 2011 and beyond in film article and then Delete the futile remains. This was a bad decision for an article. :-( Mike Allen 08:00, 5 June 2010 (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.