Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of IMAX venues (3rd nomination)

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 no consensus. There's a clear lack of community agreement over whether this crosses the line of being an unencyclopedic list of places. Further discussion as to inclusion criteria in the article may lead to a more informed decision in future. ~ mazca ^talk 18:10, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of IMAX venues

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

WP:NOTDIR. Very few of these entries would be eligible for articles or parts of articles. The central keep rationale of the previous two discussions was apparently "there are very few of them around", but this is clearly no longer the case! –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 21:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:00, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTDIR. Last AfD was over ten years ago standards have changed. Having IMAX accreditation does not make any venue inherently notable especially given there are hundreds of them across the world. This article recently came up as part of another similar discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dolby Cinema venues - removed for similar reasoning. Ajf773 (talk) 03:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep twice discussed and twice closed as keep. Seems to be as clear of a case of WP:FORUMSHOP as there can be.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you even know what Forum Shopping is?--Rusf10 (talk) 03:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per NOTDIR. As Ajf773 has noted, times have changed, and IMAX is not a rarity anymore. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:01, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful and notable. A couple dozen have articles. Inclusion criteria can be adjusted. The Dolby article contained mainly redlinks. wumbolo ^^^ 13:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't see a couple dozen. I see a lot of city links, as well as some companies, museums and centers. There are a couple of entries like Scotiabank Theatre Toronto, which has 14 screens, one of which is IMax. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:13, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Clarityfiend: Category:IMAX venues. wumbolo ^^^ 08:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is clearly a very useful list to the public as the page views show an average of 1700 views a day and the category with 94 entries shows it is in a large part notable Atlantic306 (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Among the worst keep arguments ever, see WP:POPULARPAGE--Rusf10 (talk) 03:46, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While Dolby accreditation in quite normal nowadays—in some parts of the world lacking Dolby would be the rare exception—IMAX is an investment that only few movie theatres can afford. The WP:NOTDIR problem here is apparent, but we should try to solve that per policy, see WP:DEL-CONTENT, which should leave us with a short little list of IMAX venues already found in Category:IMAX venues; and such lists we usually keep per WP:LISTOUTCOMES pursuant to the guideline on categories, lists, and navigation templates. Sam Sailor 09:45, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Clear violation of WP:NOTDIR, we already have an appropriate category for this. With few exceptions, most of these are just movie theaters that are not otherwise notable.--Rusf10 (talk) 03:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POPULARPAGE says popularity may be linked to notability and if we shouldnt mention page views why are they linked at the top of every afd discussion, theyve certainly been quoted a lot at the portals rfc, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2018 (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.