Talk:Pseudo-documentary
 | A fact from Pseudo-documentary appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 December 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
List of examples?
[edit]This article is set up as if it was going to discuss the genre of pseudo-documentary, but then simply lists a few examples in movies and television. Either the body should be written to provide an academic discussion (e.g., history, background, maybe pros and cons), or the introduction should set up that what follows is a collection of examples. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 13:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good point regarding WP:LEAD compliance. I think the right direction to go is to add a section discussing the genre, then the lead section can be adjusted to say that there are also individual examples. Binksternet (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm flagging this article for deletion
[edit]Unless someone explains why it should stay. It's simply a descriptor for a documentary mainstream science doesn't agree with an isn't helpful or useful. There's no such thing as a pseudo-documentary; it's just a perjorative, and needs no article for it, rather an urban dictionary page would be more suitable.