Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Failed predictions

Failed predictions

It is half a list of quotations, half original research. There's no standard for inclusion--sources are incredibly diverse, and everyone knows that predictions often fail, anyway. Unencyclopedic. Grace 07:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. GassyGuy 08:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment This list may be interesting, but the same can be said of many other things (e.g., personal essays) which also do not belong here. Also, consider the vast amount this covers. I have old fantasy football magazines that predict various things about NFL players. Should I add quotes about the expected fantasy worth of Philip Rivers? Should I find people who have failed to predict the proper results of various elections? Should I pull quotes from magazines or other sources that predicted Chris Daughtry would win American Idol in the fifth season? If this list has its place somewhere, let it grow happily, but I do not see it as the sort of article which belongs on Wikipedia. Perhaps if it were more specialized to some degree that it could reasonable be kept, I would vote differently, but as it stands, this is an indiscriminate collection of non-notable information with great potential to spiral into a great mess. GassyGuy 07:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, definitely encyclopedic, WP:NOR, WP:V. --Terence Ong 08:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• delete William M. Connolley 08:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep though definitely should be purged. Could include predictions that followers of psychics and politicians deny they ever made - Skysmith 10:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as is and expand. I see a huge potential for growth for this article. Royalbroil 14:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Or: Is there a possibility of this being transferred piecemeal to Wikiquotes? Markeer 14:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. Infinite, indiscriminate list with inherent POV problems. Vizjim 14:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• I hope and predict this will be Deleted. If not deleted, I demand that this prediction be added to it. -- GWO
• Delete per nom--Kalsermar 17:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete completely unmaintainable listcruft KleenupKrew 00:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, interesting list that's gathered a lot of crust over the last three years. Topic seems valid, not sure why you'd want to dump the entire thing instead of trying to clean it up. First step would be to start a talk page discussion on narrowing the scope; not deleteing the entire thing. Kuru ^talk 01:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia isn't a place for lists of quotes in the first place - that's for Wikiquote. Secondly, why list failed predictions? Predictions often fail, often succeed - what is notable about that? Failed predictions as a category aren't notable in themselves, though they may be good in the relevant articles. (Would we want a list of successful predictions, where somebody once said something like "Everyone will drive cars to work in the future"?) --Grace 02:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, Why delete it? If it doesn't seem "professional" enough, why doesn't it just get cleaned up a bit. It's an extremely enjoyable read, and a more complete list of failed predictions is nowhere to be found anywhere on the web. It is the perfect supplement to the 'predictions' Wikipage, and it would be downright discriminatory to deny people the right to explore the various predictions made over the years that have amounted to nothing! I say clean it up, but don't delete it.
• Keep. Huge potential for growth. SushiGeek 10:00, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep If you still want to delete it, why not integrate many of these quotes into their respective articles? And we just have to keep those failed Doomsday predictions- as far as I'm concerned, they're a part of human history, and, therefore, are worthy of inclusion in any encyclopaedia. By the way, can somebody explain what Wikiquote is?Ackatsis 12:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I feel that it is certainly suitable for Wikipedia, and there is great potential for growth.