Talk:List of teen films

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

keep, 22 February 2011 (UTC), see discussion.
no consensus, 23 December 2008 (UTC), see discussion.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Listcruft

This page is listcruft. There must be a hundred thousand teen movies, this should be a category and not an article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.21.56 (talk • contribs) 23:05, March 12, 2008

X-men series

Why isn't the X-men series here?--200.80.164.47 (talk) 21:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teen film

Could someone please clarify on what are the requirements for including a film on this list?

Failng that on what basis can a film be excluded from this list?

What is this list trying to achieve? The article is tagged as unreferenced but what kind of references I would I even need to provide to show a film belongs on this list?

For example, the titualar character of The Graduate is a University graduate and definitely not a teenager, so it seems odd for it to be included in this list. Other films such as Higher Learning are also University films, so the teen film seems inappropriate. The Transformers and Spider-man films may feature teenagers as their main characters or be primarly aimed at younger audience but again I wonder what makes their inclusion here relevant? -- Horkana (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is fair to set an absolute minimum requirement that a film should be released and have a Wikipedia page before being included on this list. How else can anyone even begin to verify it meets the (extremely vague) requirements of being on the list. -- Horkana (talk) 13:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for advice from Wikipedia project lists on how this list might be cleaned up. The advice was to find sources supporting the idea/theme/trope of "Teen Cinema" and go from there. That would very likely exclude about 90% of what has been included on this list, I'm still reticent to wade into this messy article. -- Horkana (talk) 13:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Category or series article instead

I've removed the section on /* Body swap films */ There's a category for that: Category:Body_switching_movies. If you feel it should be added back then please discuss. A link of some form might be appropriate and I wouldn't object to that.

As a cleanup plan I'm considering removing other sections that are already well served by categories or have a film series article that covers them far better than this article possibly could. In some cases such as the American Pie series for example, there does seem to be a good reason to keep them in this article but if I go ahead with this plan to try and keep this article sensible and organized I will reduce them from lists to either a link to the first film and a see also link for the series, or just one single link. -- Horkana (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the individual films, for series but it was knocked out by another reorganisation of the article. Will discuss below. -- Horkana (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sections

The sections that layout the article, in my opinion has some point of view issues. What it be better to reorganize the article in a more neutral way say by year or decade?--TriiipleThreat (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By decade sounds good. I'd like to verify as many films as possible first, though. Depends on if you think reorganization will help impress at AFD. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just reorganized by decade using a couple of Excel tricks. There may be duplicate titles, though, since some titles were repeated in different sections. I would recommend targeting 1990s and 2000s especially for vetting. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:42, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Will make things more managable I suppose but chronology isn't a particulary interesting way to group things. It also knocks out my edit that dropped the individual films whena film series article is available (suggested above, but no comments in response, or objections). I might reinstitute that change, including the series article in place of the first film in a series.

On a slightly different matter I'm not at all a fan of the 3 column layout. Your screen size is not everyone elses screen size and there are a lot of users that 3 columns will look ugly for. If you must use columns please do not go past 2 columns. -- Horkana (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we can do two columns instead. Sorry about knocking out the series links. Did you want to do a "See also" section? The "by decade" approach is an experiment, but we can revert back. I think that it is too challenging to worry about sub-genres here. It also runs the risk of the sub-genre actually being the main genre with the teen film being the sub-genre. Going by year will make it more about the teen films, hopefully. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:57, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict. Happened again. No worries, just glad to see someone tackling this mess. I'll see if I can make a few small changes later. I probably wouldn't add a "See also" section.

As I said in an edit summary a while back I don't think a list article should include films that do not have articles. I removed the redlinked films before and was removing them again before another conflict, so I've dropped the edit for now. When the article is less busy I'll come back and remove the redlinks for anything this is not referenced. (I'm quite happy to have redlinks for people who do not yet have articles, films not so much.) -- Horkana (talk) 17:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, sorry about that. I should use one of these in-use templates. Anyway, I agree about excluding red links. I had added a couple but did not realize they were red. They can be removed for now; there are enough films on this list. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:13, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say nice work on the article.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 14:01, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion

At the top of the talk page, I established some criteria for including a film in this list. Since the AFD closed to keep, I removed all the items that were not verifiable. It is the burden of the editor who adds or restores material to indicate that it is verifiable as a teen film. This is the revision of the list before I removed the unverifiable items. Maybe we can cull the uncited items from that list and place them here and migrate them back in with citation? Erik (talk | contribs) 16:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Teen horror movies

It seems like there are a lot of films in the Category:Teen horror films that are absent from this list. A few (Scream, I Know What You Did Last Summer) are included but not the many teen films from the 1970s and 1980s, like the Nightmare series, the Halloween series or the Friday the 13th series (and their many imitators). They were not great films but they are what I think of when I think of "teen films". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:03, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]