Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deaths in Final Destination 3

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 all. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deaths in Final Destination 3

Deaths in Final Destination 3 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Redundant with the plot sections. Expanding upon that is horror fancruft. It is violating the growing consensus for a word limit for film plot synopses. I have also seen a more basic list of deaths being added to the films' articles: these are redundant to the plot section and looks like something an amateur fan site would do. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Deaths in Scream. Delete The JPS^{talk to me} 15:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all of the same "article" genre:

Deaths in Final Destination (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Deaths in Final Destination 2 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

• Oh, Delete. Don't forget to see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Deaths in Scream for further arguing. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 15:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete all. - fancruft. --Bryson 16:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• 'Delete and Salt'Merge Delete (see revision of revised comment below) — far worse than fancruft, it's a kind of violent pornography that has no possible encyclopedic value. Each death is lovingly detailed to heighten the sadistic effect. Here's a quote from the Deaths in Final Destination article:

He then walks over to the tub and slips on the puddle, causing him to fall on a clothesline cord, which snaps off the wall and, pulled by the velocity of Tod's fall, wraps tightly around his neck several times and strangles him in the tub, while he struggles to stand up, but only manages to kick over bottles of shampoo and soap, spilling them inside the tub and making it slippery and preventing him from getting to his feet. The blood vessels in his eyes burst as he tries to break free from the wire and reach a pair of scissors on the counter across the room. He slowly weakens and finally dies

This is what constitutes the entire article. Do we have porn pictures with the articles on porn stars? Video snippets of Debbie Does Dallas? To my mind this is violence porn. Call it "Fancrud."Noroton 17:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Revised view I've taken a look at some other death-list articles. There's one for Oz and another for the Sopranos, and they don't go into nearly as much gory detail (although why a picture of a severed head in the Sopranos list is encyclopedic is beyond me). I don't have nearly as much problem with that because I can see the sliver of an encyclopedic value in it, but to keep down the detail, which has absolutely no encyclopedic value, I think they should all be merged with the plot articles.Noroton 17:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think they are mainly already merged within the plot sections is as much depth as needed. The JPS^{talk to me} 19:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Revising my revision (Flaky of me? Well just call it being open minded ...) I'm changing my mind yet again on my ultimate !vote: JPS is right, the plot descriptions give as much depth as an encyclopedic article needs. Noroton 12:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP KEEP! It's been a freakin article for half a year and NOW you want to delete it. there should be a law about that, Don't PUT AN ARTICLE UP FOR DELETION IF IT'S BEEN AN ARTICLE FOR MORE THAN SIX MONTHS!!!!! No, extreme keep!why the heck did you decide to freakin put it up for deletion?!? That's not a good excuse!!!!!! Chikinpotato11 18:41, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • There's almost 2 million articles on the English Wikipedia. We can't spot them all. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    • That still isn't a good excuse. Wikipedia is "So high tech and awesome" yet it takes the freakin thing with ALL of it's "Smart" users who "try to improve" "The so called geat website known as "WIKIPEDIA"" a FREAKING (i desrve to curse but i won't) seven months to think "Hey we missed an article, we are dumb after all but let's just put the article up for deletion now and people probably won't notice". Yeah, wikipedia is really smart. Chikinpotato11 02:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete This is superfluous information. Qualifies as fancruft. --PhantomS 22:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film and TV-related deletions. -- The JPS^{talk to me} 19:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

• Just a bit of info, check out the FD3 Discussion page. There was a huge arguement on whether or not to keep or delete. 211.30.223.128 08:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

• Seriously Keep Unlike other horror based series the friday the 13th is by far more notable for its over-the-top death lists. Also the FD series is basically a slide-show of accidental deaths and they constitute to the plot (It should be noted that they were created to prevent the main article from being too long) Jamesbuc
  • Comment: When a plot section gets too long, the idea is to try to cut it down: not make another one. Seriously, this is bad.

The JPS^{talk to me} 11:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

• • Comment Unfortunately with the FD series unless the deaths/misses ARE explained the plot would suffer. Just saying 'Carter is saved and Billy dies' (ive seen that put down once) places little point on the plot and the happenings. Jamesbuc
• Delete If it can't be merged into the main article it probably shouldn't exist at all. This should be on a fansite rather than wikipedia. Speedything 16:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• Okay, think about this. For example, Tod Waggner- Killed by strangulation by clothes line. Inside or out? How on earth did he get strangled by a CLOTHES LINE? Lotsa questions get asked if the death is summerised in one brief sentence. Think about it your self. If it was your first time looking at the movie, what would you think about their deaths? The F13 movies is unnecessary, as it's either pop, rip or stab. NOthing creative. 211.30.223.128 09:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment even though id usually agree with that this time id have to disagree as both series in question are known for thier deaths and not much else. User:Jamesbuc

• Keep. Eh? What a stupid proposal? The deaths are essential to the plot in illustrating that death would catch up with people. They can't make a popular movie by saying: "We got out of a crashed plane, and no we are each being picked off one by one. We won't tell you how, but use your imagination..." The deaths are imperative to the plot and, hence the movie's success. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oliverlock (talk • contribs) 20:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC).
  • This is the user's 5th edit. Account created today. The JPS^{talk to me} 21:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, this isn't the movie, but an encyclopedia. The deaths are adequately covered in the plot summaries. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 21:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Also, excessive plot summaries may be violations of copyright. The JPS^{talk to me} 21:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series: noteworthy list of an important plot element. In line with WP:LISTV. Unless we decide that the series as such is unencyclopedic, we should keep the list. -- User:Docu —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Docu (talk • contribs) 07:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series per Docu. It seems to provide a concise summary of an important plot element without going over the top, isn't simply a plot summary, and I can imagine contexts where it would be useful to readers. I suggest merging the Final Destination death lists into one article, something like Lists of deaths in the Final Destination series and mirroring the tone/brevity of the Friday the 13th list. As they stand currently they're simply mega-gory recapitulations of the plot. Cut the pictures and the fancruft. janejellyroll 07:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Listcruft/fancruft. Yes, horror movies feature lots of deaths, but that doesn't mean we need mass lists of them here. Take it to a fan wiki. RobJ1981 15:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong delete as fancruft. Reywas92^Talk 17:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Key information to accompany the main FD3 article. Though I second janejellyroll's suggestion of a single page with all the FD deaths merged into one article. NeilSenna 18:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • User had made about 20 edits only in the last year [1] The JPS^{talk to me} 23:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    • And? User frequently edits without logging in... NeilSenna 17:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong delete The worst kind of fancruft - Wikipedia doesn't need this kind of list or plot summary, it's better suited for a fanpage, etc. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 11:36, 22 February 2007 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.