Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Potter film/book differences (2nd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. These articles are still unsourced, and WP:V / WP:NOR, as core policies, are not negotiable. All but one of the "keep" or "merge" opinions do not address this issue. As to the merger proposals, unsourced content should not be merged, but Fbv65edel has provided links to similar, sourced content that could be. Sandstein 22:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

edit
AfDs for this article:
Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Also nominated
Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Differences between book and film versions of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nearly, three months on, there has been no attempt to source the pages at all - the only thing sourced throughout the set of five is the cutlist from OotP. As it stands now, it's still the original research I nominated first time around. Will (talk) 22:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete because these entries have zero real-world context. There are always, always going to be changes in the adaptation of a source material for creative and conventional reasons -- the only notable changes to record should be those covered by published, secondary sources, not what an editor subjectively deems appropriate. It is original research for an editor who has watched the film and read the book to put 2 and 2 together and determine, "The difference between these pieces of information is notable to belong on Wikipedia!" I'm looking at the article now, and I see an incredibly insipid difference in hair color. I can't say that the other changes mean much, either, if there is no real-world context to determine that all these differences mean something except to "It's useful" to Harry Potter fans. Such differences should belong on a Harry Potter Wikia, not on this encyclopedia. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 12:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Differences in hair color are not the differences we are negotiating keeping. We are debating differences such as the absence of a major character, or a major change in the plot, which should all, IMO, be condensed to one or two paragraphs in the main film article. Lots of other book-to-film articles note differences in plot and we're just following that standard. No, we're not going to merge them and note the fact that Filch says "Caught in the act!" in the second film, while really Ernie Macmillan says it in the book. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 14:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are not reliable sources -- these are fan sites. This is reflected in its history. Per WP:RS, "Reliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight." Anyone can publish a page like that and cite it to be used on Wikipedia -- that's why we have these standards. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The previous AfD's already pointed to a strong merge, and since this topic is already discussed in an editorial process, I endorse keep for now with a necessary merge rather sooner than later. – sgeureka t•c 14:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, but don't close the discussion. Editors outside the Harry Potter project have the right to have their voice heard, and not it's here it should stay here until the normal period expires. Discussions at the project could, of course, be taken into account by the closing admin. - fchd 16:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was simply saying it would make things a whole lot easier if there wasn't a strong voice of dissent or disagreement from the project -- if we all agreed on one thing it would make things organized. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 17:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge, because some movies do not yet have a book/film differences section on their page. Libertyernie2 17:03, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do you want to merge content that is not backed by authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand? The only contributors here have been the editors themselves, and it's not encyclopedic to let them decide for themselves, after comparing two different resources, what differences to note between the two. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think if you can find multible HP fansites with information, it can be in the Wikipedia page, but as a section, not as its own page. This is very important info to include in the films' pages, however. harry potter book movie differences - Google Search Libertyernie2 19:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is also this article from Digital Spy, a reputable science fiction publication. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 20:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen that article before, and I think that it would be acceptable to use. Most of the resources provided, however, do not seem to meet reliable source criteria. I would suggest using the DS citation to create the appropriate sections (Writing seems best). But on the whole, this article's content does not warrant encyclopedic existence. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We've just started to write a very condensed version of the articles on subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter/Notability/Differences. For Order of the Phoenix, I found a great source at Salon.com, an interview with the screenwriter, in which he discusses the reasons for cutting a number of scenes, as well as Rowling's views on film changes. MTV wrote about the change in Kreacher's role. Miranda Richardson commented in a red carpet interview for movie 4 about the cutting of her character in the fifth. So there are a number of sources which document the changes, which we will use to write two to three paragraphs, approximately, to make a new section in the film articles. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 20:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've basically completed primary drafts of the cutting down of information. See subpages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 for our planned merges of each article to its film article.. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 06:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the film and book are notable, however the subject of the article - their comparison - isn't sufficiently notable. Addhoc 15:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC) (duplicate)[reply]
  • I don't think Happy-melon is (necessarily) suggesting the articles be deleted -- just that they at least be redirected to their film articles, and a new section be added to the film articles, as written on the subpages linked above. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 19:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • What I mean is, there is no likely AfD outcome that will not result in this replacement occuring. Delete --> articles are deleted, the drafts are inserted into the relevant film articles. Merge --> articles are redirected, the drafts are inserted into the relevant film articles. Redirect --> same as for merge. The only outcome that will not result in these articles being blanked is Keep, which I have explained above is extremely unlikely. Given that this is almost certain to the outcome of the debate, why wait unnecessarily? Happy‑melon 20:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trim and Merge: It would be better to remove the enormous amounts of access details and put a small sentence summary of the differences in the films section such as for Order of the Phoenix; In the book Umbridge was responsible for sending for the Demontors to Harry in order to discredit him while in the movie Dumbledore suggested to Harry that Voldemort was responsible.

So my point is no access detail, no need for seperate pages and a still an appropriate way for inexperinced readers to understand the minor changes between the books and movies and perhaps to not include any small or irrevant facts of things that can be explained in a character bio. As a last resort I would choose to Transwiki it to the Harry Potter Wiki and would urge other people who want to remove this stuff to consider that option. -Adv193 05:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Keep, merge and trim. It is important to have such an article. it displays the difference between the books and the films, and hence the interests in the viewer vs reader, which is a very important film technique, especially in harry potter. Since harry potter books are so long, its important that they only extract the parts within the books that appeal to the viewer, and more importantly the subject audience, -(after all they are only making these films to make money and win awards). If they include all the lessons, and conversations within harry potter, frankly it would bore the audience to death. an example is the 4th book, where the middle of the book, which was a degraded cliche, was mainly cut out, and the 3 tasks, and the yule ball were shown, as they appeal to the viewer. If we delete this section we will be delete an important dimension to the anaylisis of harry potter. addy-gAddy-g-indahouse 22:49, 18 September 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Harry_Potter_film/book_differences_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1137901002"