Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Futurama products

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Wizardman 23:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Futurama products[edit]

A list of jokes people noticed while watching Futurama. Unreferenced, no hope for references other than personal observation of the show itself, and wholly unencyclopedic. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: nom seems to be contradiction vs WP:EPISODE guideline ("An actual episode may be used as a source for information about the episode and constitutes a primary source. Such use does not constitute original research if it is used to verify a fact."). However, any non-obvious interpretations about what the products spoof do need citations or removal, per the followup part of that guideline ("However, the episode cannot be used to justify an interpretation.")...can't remember if the commentary track on the DVDs has any info for that. DMacks 05:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is an indiscriminate list of jokes, based on idiosyncratic criteria, and it fails WP:FICT's standards for sourcing (commentary independent of the subject itself). Nobody has ever felt the need to comment on any of these jokes in particular or the whole in general; why should Wikipedia be the first source to comment? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As opposed to all the other lists up for deletion, this has well defined criteria and a limited possible number of entries. As to the concern about citing only itself, pages on characters are almost always written "in universe." Recurring dreams 09:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are lots of problematic articles that need fixing or deleting. That's no reason to ignore WP:WAF. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 09:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Macks and Recurring. Mandsford 14:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unfortunately; all the sources for this article are from Futurama episodes, which are primary sources, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources asks for independent, third-party sources about a subject. Unfortunately, while some of these products are clever, they don't have the sources to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 18:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per DMacks and Recurring dreams. Lugnuts 18:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.