Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Keller! The Musical: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:50, 27 March 2008

Helen Keller! The Musical

No chance of ever becoming a proper encyclopedic article. Dorftrottel (warn) 20:09, March 27, 2008 20:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

keep, no worse than any other episode article for South Park or any other show. There is precedent so it's hard to single out this article.--Rtphokie (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- True, but why not start with this "article"? Dorftrottel (troll) 22:35, March 27, 2008
Keep It's easy to tear something down, but a bit harder to create. Nominator's only interaction with this article has been to remove content and now to propose deletion. Why this specific episode, out of the hundreds of South Park articles? Look at this article's history; its growth and refinement continues, it is in no way stagnant and will continue to improve. -- Captain Infinity (talk) 21:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I removed completely unreferenced original research of more than doubtful quality. Incidentally, that left nothing but a plot summary. So, no sources (none on Google at least, perhaps you know any?), no viable content — no article. I'm not trying to "tear something down", as you imply, but trying to keep Wikipedia encyclopedic. Dorftrottel (troll) 22:35, March 27, 2008
Strong keep, I quote what User:Peregrine Fisher said in a similar debate half a year ago: there are some really good SP articles, including (I beleive) three GA episode articles. 3/160 for GAs is actually a much higher ratio than the 3000/2000000 there is for normal articles. It's going to take a while a to get all the episode articles up to snuff, but it's going to be a lot quicker than getting WP up to snuff. Let them live an be improved. Additonally, the nominator provides no serious arguments and all or the vast majority of South Park episodes have recieved enough independent coverage, just because it is not mentioned in this article does not mean it does not exist. 96T (talk) 22:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- With all due respect, no available sources and no viable content are two very serious arguments. If you know reliable sources for this specific episode, by all means please include them in the article. Dorftrottel (bait) 22:40, March 27, 2008
Comment. Maybe I should make this clear: The reason I put this up for deletion is that there is no article. Nothing speaks against recreating the page iff reliable sources can be found and encyclopedic content added. Currently, this page is simply not an article at all, and therefore has no place in Wikipedia's mainspace. Dorftrottel (canvass) 22:38, March 27, 2008

Comment There was an article until you gutted it. -- Captain Infinity (talk) 22:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 **With all due respect, ''no available sources'' and ''no viable content'' are two very serious arguments. If you know reliable sources for this specific episode, by all means please include them in the article. [[User:Dorftrottel#DT|'''D'''or'''<!-- -->ft'''ro'''tt'''el]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Dorftrottel|bait]])  22:40,&nbsp;[[March 27]],&nbsp;200<!--DT-->8
 *'''Comment'''. Maybe I should make this clear: The reason I put this up for deletion is that ''there is no article''. Nothing speaks against recreating the page [[iff]] reliable sources can be found and encyclopedic content added. Currently, this page is simply not an article at all, and therefore has no place in Wikipedia's mainspace. [[User:Dorftrottel#DT|'''D'''or'''<!-- -->ft'''ro'''tt'''el]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Dorftrottel|canvass]])  22:38,&nbsp;[[March 27]],&nbsp;200<!--DT-->8
+::'''Comment'''  There '''was''' an article until you gutted it. -- [[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] ([[User talk:Captain Infinity|talk]]) 22:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)