Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/79th Academy Awards

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 06:53, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 79th Academy Awards

- unlaid egg - should come back when it had happened --Wittkowsky 7 July 2005 13:12 (UTC)

• Keep It is only the year after next. Absolutely nothing will be gained by making people create this twice (except possibly making a potentially or actually valuable contributor give up on Wikipedia). CalJW 7 July 2005 15:05 (UTC)
  • So you want to keep a contentless article just so in two years time someone won't have to type a single sentence over again? -R. fiend 8 July 2005 05:12 (UTC)
• Weak keep - it does no harm, and will have to be created eventually... but it's too early to know any info on the event (e.g. the article says it will be held in Hollywood, but that's not set in stone). -- BD2412 ^talk July 7, 2005 15:18 (UTC)
• Weak keep. WP:NOT a crytal ball, which is all this article is going to encourage. But seeing as we know for sure that the event will happen at the time and place specified (with reasonable certainty) there is some encyclopedic info here. -Splash 7 July 2005 16:04 (UTC)
• Delete: It's too early. Sure, we know it's going to happen...we know the 2122 Olympic Games are going to happen too (I say in East St. Louis, who's with me?) But that doesn't mean there should be an article on them. —ArmadniGeneral 7 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)
• Delete. Setting a precedent by allowing this to stay up does no good. What happens when someone takes it upon his or herself to make Academy Awards pages for the next 50 years of awards? Suppose the Academy is dissolved by the Emperor in 2006? Who knows? WP:NOT a crystal ball, as mentioned by Splash. Fernando Rizo 7 July 2005 16:33 (UTC)
• Delete, the 78th (i.e., next one) would be fine but beyond that is crystal ball territory. Dcarrano July 7, 2005 16:53 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. --Carnildo 7 July 2005 20:11 (UTC)
• Delete. Utterly pointless. -R. fiend 7 July 2005 20:55 (UTC)
• Delete. Avoiding articles about future events is a good thing. Re-creating it when it is a bona-fide event with actual facts to report won't be any trouble at all. There is no reason to keep it around until then and it is possibly harmful inasmuch as it encourages other content-less articles like it.Tobycat 8 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)
• Delete. Content-free crystal ball. --Calton | Talk 8 July 2005 01:35 (UTC)
• Delete, crystal ball. Radiant_>|< July 8, 2005 12:46 (UTC)
• Delete as premature. 23skidoo 8 July 2005 21:38 (UTC)
• Delete wikipedia is not a crystal ball. JamesBurns 9 July 2005 02:44 (UTC)
• Delete, I wouldn't mind seeing the 78th Academy Awards deleted as well. --KFP 9 July 2005 13:25 (UTC)
• Delete - We may not even be using Arabic numerals then. -Acjelen 04:47, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - I swithered about this, since it's premature. We've allowed "future elections" to have a page, but in those cases we've been able to say something useful about them. In this situation, all we have is "It will take place on date X in (general place) Y". If we were able to say that the system would be changing for that year, or if there was something notable that doesn't just class it as "like the 77th, with different names"... but no. Note that we kept U.S. presidential election, 2008 but deleted U.S. presidential election, 2012 - we can say something useful and relevant about -2008, but there's nothing other than random speculation we can currently write about -2012. Shimgray 13:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.