Talk:Deaton-Flanigen Productions
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Chetsford in topic Full protected
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deaton-Flanigen Productions article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Promo and Undue
editThe stupendous list is promotional and undue, and I have removed it again. Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:09, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Roxy the dog: I've fully protected the article again (I did it before in February for one week), this time for 10 days. If you and TenPoundHammer, as well as any other editors, can't come to a clear consensus about the material, don't edit the article after the protection expires. If you do, you risk being blocked for edit-warring, regardless of the number of reverts you make.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- WP:ONUS is the pretty clear policy here on this with no attempts to even gain consensus on inserting the content back in, so there doesn't seem to be anything out of line with Roxy's edits at least with responding to the long-term edit warring that.
- Both Roxy and Drmies brought up problems with promotional content in the edits, and those look pretty clear when I look at them too. At no point should anyone have thought they should just add it back in one more time without gaining consensus. Kingofaces43 (talk) 17:08, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: @Roxy the dog: I fail to see how any of the content is promotional in nature. Every entry in the videography list is sourced to a reputable source -- most of the videos are for country music artists, so CMT is a valid source for that. Other music video directors such as Darren Doane, Sherman Halsey, etc. have similar videographies with similar caliber sources. @Roxy the dog: would you please care to explain how you find this content is promotional or undue? Should a music video director not have a reliably-sourced videography? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- I normally don't look at other articles per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but your examples above (Sherman and Darren) their "videographies" are also UNDUE and PROMO. I wasn't arguing about sourcing, but a huge list of videos does not an article make. Do we list the number of ingots British Steel make? Worth noting that I am not the only time served editor who feels this way about this article. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 08:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- WP:NOTDIR is a pretty straightforward policy here too. We're not a place to list out all the products of a company. Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: WP:NOTDIR does not apply. That's like saying actors' pages shouldn't have filmographies, or singers' pages should not have discographies. They're a video production company. They have a notable body of work, and it should be listed just like an actor filmography or singer discography. How is this any different? How are these "products" any moreso than an actor's movie or TV show, or a singer's album or single? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- The spirit of that policy is that we don't go doing indiscriminate lists, directories, etc. At this point, multiple editors have brought up problems with that here. Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: HOW is it indiscriminate or promotional? It has a clear inclusion criteria and reliable third party sources. Literally every other music video director on Wikipedia has a videography. Why should it be THIS ONE AND THIS ONE ONLY that does not? That's stupid. Should no music video directors have videographies? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- No need for the the pings as I'm more than capable of using the watchlist. You've already been referred to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. If there are any particularly noteworthy music videos that independent sources outline as WP:DUE in sufficient depth as is done in the first paragraph, then that should be discussed. Right now, most of the sources are just to another list at the CMT website. This category already exists, and that's where such indiscriminate listings go. Kingofaces43 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: HOW is it indiscriminate or promotional? It has a clear inclusion criteria and reliable third party sources. Literally every other music video director on Wikipedia has a videography. Why should it be THIS ONE AND THIS ONE ONLY that does not? That's stupid. Should no music video directors have videographies? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- The spirit of that policy is that we don't go doing indiscriminate lists, directories, etc. At this point, multiple editors have brought up problems with that here. Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: WP:NOTDIR does not apply. That's like saying actors' pages shouldn't have filmographies, or singers' pages should not have discographies. They're a video production company. They have a notable body of work, and it should be listed just like an actor filmography or singer discography. How is this any different? How are these "products" any moreso than an actor's movie or TV show, or a singer's album or single? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- WP:NOTDIR is a pretty straightforward policy here too. We're not a place to list out all the products of a company. Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- I normally don't look at other articles per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but your examples above (Sherman and Darren) their "videographies" are also UNDUE and PROMO. I wasn't arguing about sourcing, but a huge list of videos does not an article make. Do we list the number of ingots British Steel make? Worth noting that I am not the only time served editor who feels this way about this article. -Roxy, the dog. wooF 08:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Kingofaces43: @Roxy the dog: I fail to see how any of the content is promotional in nature. Every entry in the videography list is sourced to a reputable source -- most of the videos are for country music artists, so CMT is a valid source for that. Other music video directors such as Darren Doane, Sherman Halsey, etc. have similar videographies with similar caliber sources. @Roxy the dog: would you please care to explain how you find this content is promotional or undue? Should a music video director not have a reliably-sourced videography? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:58, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
- Both Roxy and Drmies brought up problems with promotional content in the edits, and those look pretty clear when I look at them too. At no point should anyone have thought they should just add it back in one more time without gaining consensus. Kingofaces43 (talk) 17:08, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Full protected
editPer a request here, I've fully protected this article for 90 days. Please tell me if you find this excessive. You may also WP:RFUP if my response is not satisfactory. Chetsford (talk) 03:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)