This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror
Note - The Evil Dead films are possession/demon films, not zombie related. I'll let AoD slide cause the bad guy does have zombie like footsoldiers rise up.
List of zombie films that need to be further researched
Rise of the Damned - Michael Bafaro - 2011 film - "RISE OF THE DAMNED". British Board of Film Classification. January 29, 2011 (last updated). Retrieved November 18, 2013. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help) - IMDb - while the film got rated by the BBFC for direct-to-video, it needs information on a theater release, or any notability past some trailers; it has not been reviewed by the horror websites or media sources for actual zombies
The following movies require notability WP:NFILM beyond self-published websites, unreliable/anonymous blogs, Kickstarter, IMDB-like databases and lists, and distribution stores such as Amazon/eBay:
Long Live the Dead - 2012 film - director: Richard Poche - DVD anthology of five zombie short films - have only found Poche-related websites and Kickstarter
The Last Days of Humanity - 2002 film - director: Peter Dubiel - IMDb
The Necro Files 2 - 2003 film - director: Ron Carlo - IMDb
Necro Wars - director Robert Conway - 2010 film - IMDb IMDb announced movie was in post-production, however it is unclear whether it was properly released, even IMDb has no release date, can't find reviews online [5]
Vågn op! – en religiøs zombie parodi - dir: Peder Pedersen - 1992 film - Swedish film - IMDb
Punk Rock Zombie Kung Fu Catfight - dir: Peter Bernard 2004 film - IMDb
Raw Zombie 11 - dir: Jared Saverino - 1999 film - IMDb
Untot – Undead Unleashed (Untot — Kämpfer in der Leichenwelt, Untot) || Martin Erling || 1999 || || [4] || IMDb
Urban Scumbags vs. Countryside Zombies Reanimated - Maxim Matthew - 2009 - remake of 1992 film - IMDb - sources mainly from its own website, need others
The following movies seem to have notability, however, their release status is unknown as the supporting articles show in-production or trailers. They can best be addressed with reliable sources that point to official releases and reviews. They may be moved to the in-progress/abandoned film list, in that case, please strike them from this list.
When the RfC closes, we'll have consensus on whether non-notable films (those without an article) should be included. Other selection criteria have no basis in guidelines or policy, and I think a merge is in order. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion has been archived, however it was not merely for films which are redlinked, a previous discussion had already established a policy based consensus that having a Wikipedia article does not denote lack of notability in of itself, nor should be a criteria. The most recent consensus was that entries "that are redlinked and have only IMDB as a link (no refs)" should be removed. The second part was part of the previous discussion as well, but the entries were left on the page for the time being so references could be found iirc. Quite some time has passed since then, so removing those only supported by IMDB (or similar), to the talk page seems reasonable.Number36 (talk) 04:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
^Hagen, Markus (2007-05-06). "Mutation Annihilation (Extended Cut) Review". MarkusHagen.net (in German). dass Mutation – Annihilation aus einem Zusammenschnitt des zweiten und dritten Teils [...] (Translated: [...] that Mutation – Annihilation is the compilation of the second and third parts [...])
^"Mutation: Annihilation Review". Haikos Filmlexikon (in German). 2007. Retrieved October 12, 2013. Dieser vierte Teil ist in gewisser Weise ein Zusammenschnitt aus dem zweiten und dem dritten Teil plus vieler neuer Szenen (die bestimmt mehr als die Hälfte des Filmes ausmachen). (Translated: This fourth part is in some ways a compilation of the second and third parts plus many new scenes (which determines constitute more than half of the film).)
In light of the point I made in the section above, why have redlinked pages with WP:RS references been removed? The consensus reached on the page regarding this point was that whether a page is redlinked is not a criteria in and of itself (see archive 1), and the outcome of the most recent consensus (archive 3) concerned entries "that are redlinked and have only IMDB as a link (no refs)".Number36 (talk) 06:16, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of them look like they have the potential to be notable. I could look into creating articles on them, which might stem the edit warring from the IP editor. Unfortunately, I can't really do much about it in an administrative capacity, since I've heavily edited this article. If it continues, we could try requesting page protection at WP:RFPP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just worried it might be too big. If there's a way to have it show when someone is editing the article instead of on the article itself, that would be best. -AngusWOOF (talk) 20:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is. It's called an edit notice, and I think that's what this was designed for. That big warning on ANI that says you need to notify people is an edit notice, for example. I go back and forth on whether edit notices are useful. I doubt anyone bothers to read them, even when they're bold, all-caps, and stop-sign red. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List is overinclusive
This list includes titles that have nothing to do with the zombie trope. For instance, The Fog, where the creatures are vengeful ghosts that appear off a glowing fog and use poltergeist-like powers and are after stolen gold. To characterize such a film as a zombie film is deeply wrong, and it just ends up confusing readers who were looking for info on the topic. Problem is, the list treats The Zombie Movie Encyclopedia by Peter Dendle as a reliable source, but that book is not even remotely academically trustworthy, it just talks about random horror films like The Fog, mentioning their debts to Romero's films, which is not enough for them to be qualified as zombie films for the purpose of this list (the same rationale Dendle used would lead to call Assault on Precinct 13 a zombie film as well.) I don't think that book should be considered a reliable source. Kumagoro-42 04:13, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Seeing as how you addedParents – a horror film that has no zombies – without a source, I really don't think you should be complaining about a sourced entry from an academic. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:37, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is your answer to the issue I raised? According to this logic, since I made a mistake, that makes Dendle's book entirely trustworthy? Can you prove The Fog is unambiguously viewed as a zombie film by any source other than Dendle? Another question: shouldn't The Fog and several other films in this list be characterized as zombie films in their pages as well, either by calling them "zombie film" directly (Zombi 2) or by describing the depicted creatures as zombies (The Return of the Living Dead)? Kumagoro-42 00:53, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes, we all make mistakes. However, my point is that you did the very thing you accuse Dendle of doing – identifying a random film as a zombie film. You probably don't consider your own credibility blown, but you want to throw away Dendle's work because you disagree with one of his entries? I own both of Dendle's books, and I can say rather conclusively that they do not discuss random films. Ignoring all that, yes, there are other sources that discuss The Fog as a zombie film. Glenn Kay's Zombie Movies: The Ultimate Guide also lists it, though it says the creators view it as a ghost story. Some films, like 28 Days Later, do not have undead creatures, and others, such as The Fog, have undead creatures that more resemble revenants. However, multiple reliable sources have identified them as zombie films, perhaps because they borrow so much of the zombie film formula. Getting caught up in purist definitions is not something that Wikipedia is for; we go by the sources, not our own opinions on what constitutes a "true" zombie film. As for the other bit, I don't care what other Wikipedia articles say. It's immaterial to this article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:07, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
