Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chapter Fourteen

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus to delete. I have added the merge suggestion templates, there is probably a consensus to merge but it might be best to make sure. W.marsh 00:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter Fourteen

[edit]
Chapter Fourteen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Delete.At the end of the final Lemony Snicket novel, The End, after the thirteenth chapter (which is when the books usually end) there is one more chapter, titled Chapter Fourteen. This serves as an epilogue of sorts to the series. Snicket formats this chapter like a whole new book...title page, copyright, etceteras. Because of this, it has been granted a whole article. As it is only one chapter, I do not believe it deserves an entire article. There is nothing about it that couldn't be succintly described in the page for The End. CyberGhostface 22:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The rules state "You should not turn the article into a redirect. A functioning redirect will overwrite the AFD notice. It may also be interpreted as an attempt to "hide" the old content from scrutiny by the community." Just wait until a consensus is reached.--CyberGhostface 01:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No offense at your attempt to be high and mighty, but that is the concensus.

Clamster5 02:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you watch your act, pay attention to the rules and wait until a consensus is properly reached by an administrator, as it always done in AFD cases. Thank you.--CyberGhostface 04:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Let me get this straight. You for whatever reason are very against this chapter/short story (whatever you would like to call it). So you nominate it for deletion, even though you don't really think it should be deleted, it should just be merged/redirected (per your comments on the End talk page). You cause a big argument/discussion/debate (once again stick in whatever word you want here). People have differing views and sometimes we have problems accepting that. So after legthly arguing/discussing/debating (see above parentheses), I merge and redirect the page as you originally wanted quite a while ago (once again referecing comments on The End talk page). And now you're upset? I don't get it. You got what you wanted and you're still upset? If you truly are this upset, maybe you need a cup of hot chocolate, a kiss on the forehead, and a nap. Clamster5 04:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, at this point I no longer care. Stomp your feet, pout your lips, and whine like a five year old. Nominate every book for deletion and say they should be merged into the main asoue page. Tell everyone you see "There was this truly horrible, truly dastardly editor on Wikipedia. She thought she could actually have a differing opinion. (Laugh)." I don't care. Have a nice life. Clamster5 04:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC) (Note: This post was made 5 minutes after my first one, roughly 9 hours before you posted. Check the time stamps. I didn't reply to you. You just thought I did. This is just to show that you're too dumb to check time stamps. Clamster5 07:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC))[reply]
Your time stamps says you posted it on the eleventh, the same date I replied. Unless you're referring to something else. And if you weren't replying to me, then who the hell were you replying to? And keep up the personal insults. I've already warned you once, and if you continue, I'll have no choice but to report you.
BTW, if you "don't care", why are you still posting here?--CyberGhostface 18:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nine hours, huh? I have no idea what you're trying to say, or why its relevant to the discussion. All I know is that when I replied you had the last message. And if you weren't replying to me, who were you replying to? And why does this even matter in the first place? Do you care that much about it? I wonder what that says about you given that you've long given up any reasonal debate and have instead resorted to petty namecalling and random stupidity about timestamps.--CyberGhostface 23:04, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you trying to be ignorant or does it come natural to you? The rules state that you do not change articles into redirects while they are nominated for deletion. No exceptions. You wait until the admins look over the article and reach their decisions. There's nothing more to say on that matter, so I suggest you just accept it and get over it.--CyberGhostface 13:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems you're the one who is throwing a tantrum because you're not getting your way. I'd also mention that merging a chapter into a novel's page and merging a seperate book into the series' page are too different things. You probably knew that, and were just trying to be obnoxious.
And if you are done with this page, is that going to stop you from replying again? I thought not. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to take some hot chocolate before I get tucked in for my nap.--CyberGhostface 13:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of it's already in The End, anyway. Redirect. --

humblefool® 22:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge any information not already in The End and redirect. T Rex | talk 23:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Lemony Snicket (or Daniel Handler if you want to get technical) treats this as a seperate book. It has its own copyright, is listed as an idividual book on the list of books in the book, has its own ending picture, own page with Lemony Snicket's and Brett Helquist's pictures/bios on it. If the author treats it as its own book, we should too. Clamster5 23:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. What is told there that couldn't be told in The End's main article? I fail to see how one chapter warrants its own article, gimmicks aside. --CyberGhostface 03:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I would just like to stress that this is the most important chapter in a book series with 13 books (more if you count non main series books such as the Unathorized Autobiography). At least take that into consideration if you think your opinion is better than that of the author. Clamster5 20:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment So in other words you assuming you know what Snicket's opinion is, even though he has never said it it outright and you are just speculating? And is it really the most important chapter? That's debatable, and frankly, POV. For example, I could consider Chapter Thirteen the most important; Olaf and Kit Snicket die, Baby Beatrice is born, and we find out the fates (albeit indirectly) of Fernald, Fiona and the Quagmires. Does that chapter deserve its own article because I think its the most important?--CyberGhostface 00:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment Hey, let's keep it civil here... (which I say in a purely preventive and totally-non-accusatory way!) Anyway, point taken that "importance" is a relative term (though it's clearly one of the most important), but nobody is proposing giving any other random chapters their own pages, so the example is a bit of a straw-man. Clamster's knowledge of the author's "opinion" is obviously based on the simple fact that Chapter 14 is treated completely by "Snicket" as a book-hidden-within-a-book. It's hardly an unfair logical leap... Further, the fact that it is the ONLY Chapter 14 in a series of consistently-13-chapter-long books clearly sets it apart as special in the author's mind as well as just about anyone else's. I honestly don't understand the urgency to get rid of it. --Arvedui 08:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Comment. Yes, its important. Yes, its the only Chapter Fourteen. But its only one chapter and can easily be explained and referenced in the main End article. You're right, no one is proposing any other chapter-articles because doing so would be foolish...just as giving what is little more than a glorified epilogue its own article is. It does deserve special mention in the End article, but it does not deserve its own article.--CyberGhostface 22:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Unfortunately, you've once again ignored the key point of the author's fairly obvious intention that the "chapter" be treated as a separate small book hidden inside a larger book. That alone clearly distinguishes it from "foolish" proposals to dedicate separate articles to any other random chapter. It may indeed be a "glorified epilogue", but it's clearly being glorified for a number of reasons which are important to the story as a whole, and I think we would be doing a disservice to the series and Wikipedia's coverage of it to lump it in with the "previous" book in any way other than appending the entire Chapter 14 page (including book info-box) to the end of Book 13's--which would then inevitably lead to the question of why it doesn't just get its own page, as it happens to right now. --Arvedui 01:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • Who says it deserves its own infobox either? That'd be pretty redundant given that 90% of the information applies to the End as well, right? Its not a seperate piece of work, which is what I don't think you understand. Its a continuation of an already existing novel. If it was say a new short story that could stand on its own (like Snicket's Lump of Coal story which was published in the Boston Globe) it might deserve its own article. But right now it could very easily be condensed into one paragraph at the end of the End article rather than a bloated redundant article. Its not two different stories in one book. Its the same one, which just so happens to be split up near the end.--CyberGhostface 01:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                • (sigh) One more time, all together now: "Authorial intent" ... "glorified for a number of important reasons" ... "disservice by lumping it in" ... "what's the harm?" I also think describing the Ch.14 article as bloated and redundant is a bit much considering the only duplication at the moment is the section on the Charles Beaudelaire poem (which could just as easily be removed from "The End"). --Arvedui 02:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                  • And to think you were talking about being civil before? But maybe the rules only apply to you when you want them to. And I noticed how you ignored everything I said and just regurgitated your old comments without responding to what I said. Its not a seperate work. The End is seperate form Penultimate Peril. The Bad Beginning is seperate from the Reptile Room. Chapter Fourteen is not a seperate work from the End. Its a disservice by writing about a ten-page chapter in the book that it appeared in? Whatever you say.--CyberGhostface 04:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I'm very sorry you feel I was being uncivil towards you--my comment certainly wasn't intended that way and to be honest, I don't see any incivility in it myself. If you mean the (sigh), that was simply an expression of exasperation at the fact that your response didn't address a single one of the key points I raised, which is also why I felt I had to repeat them. Also, "Authorial intent" plus "glorified for a reason" (plus some comments elsewhere on this page) were my earlier answers to your assertion that the Book and the Chapter are totally inseparable, which, again, you haven't yet addressed (beyond pointing out that they are published in one volume, which is still beside the point).
Incidentally, I haven't heard of the "Lump of Coal" story you mentioned. Perhaps you could start a page on it. --Arvedui 09:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for misunderstanding you. For the record, the Lump of Coal (which is, I just found out, from Usa Today) can be read here.[1]
I don't really believe that Snicket intends for Chapter Fourteen to be considered a seperate work. Wouldn't the title alone make it Chapter Fourteen of an already existing work, not an entirely seperate one? If it was a seperate work, why didn't Snicket give it a more distinguished name, like the Eerie Epilogue or something? Also, its not like its even its own seperate story in terms of plot...its just another chapter carrying on from the previous chapters. Had Snicket done another plot that was unrelated from the general story (like one chapter detailing the lives of Lemony and Beatrice) I might be more willing to consider it a different story. But formatting gimmicks aside, whose true intentions are unknown, is there anything about it that makes it a different story for deserving its own article?--CyberGhostface 18:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect. Regardless of how Snicket considers this chapter, it's bound and sold as part of "The End". We don't have separate articles for the six "books" of The Lord of the Rings, even though they're written separately: we have three articles for the three bound volumes. Zetawoof(ζ) 00:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If I recall, the 6-book division was arbitrarily imposed on Tolkien by the publisher, who believed that people wouldn't buy or want to read such big thick books, but it was in fact written originally as a trilogy. The analogy between the two doesn't quite hold, then, especially since the numerology is clearly irrelevant to Tolkien's work while it is central to the structure of ASOUE. --Arvedui 08:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or merge. It may be only one chapter, but what nobody seems to have considered is that it's one of the most important chapters because it's the last. Declaration of interest: I'm one of the article's contributors. Lee M 03:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge The author treating it as a separate book is a joke similar to meta-fiction, not a serious assertion that it is actually a separate work. JChap2007 03:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect. It cannot be considered a 'book' in its own right - not without some mention in either Library of Congress or British Library. Eddie.willers 05:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep per Clamster5. It's not like including one extra page is going to fill up Wikipedia. Also, the entire set of books is already practically A Series of Meta-Fictional Gimmicks which the existing articles basically respect (with a wink and a nod, so to speak), so I don't see why or what it would hurt for us to respect this one too. -- Arvedui 05:50, 7 November 2006
  • Keep per Clamster5 --Orpras 07:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 08:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge don't delete; the content has value and should be blended in the the existing! Authorial intention is to be counted - but does not overrule basic practices. If a chapter is called a chapter it is a chapter. If a "chapter" is called a short story is guess what, a "short story". If a chapter is included as part of a publication of single narrative stream it is part of that publication, either a collection of stories or one story, i.e. a novel. The publisher obviously considered the "chapter" as part of the final novel and bound and published it that way. Initial publishing vehicle should be considered the "prime" and historically significant method of delivery. The same arguements (allbeit reversed) apply to Lord of the Rings and it's three novels. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with this line of reasoning, except that I don't for several reasons. In the LOTR example, the "books" were separated simply by a single page which said "Book Two" or "Book Four". It was clear that they were little more than section-markers, and indeed many authors use divisions like "Book One," "Book Two" etc without ever intending that they be published separately. In this case, Chapter Fourteen is preceded by all the usual trappings of a regular book, including blank pages, copyright info, title-page, other-works-by, etc. It also isn't intended to be published separately, true, but there is also an internally-consistent (to the story) logic behind having it published the way it was. And don't get too hung up on the name--meta-fiction is tricky that way! --Arvedui 10:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment What would be the purpose of deleting this page anyway? Since you clearly feel very strongly about not having this page for some reason, why didn't you just discuss it on the Chapter Fourteen or the The End talk page and then simply merge the information and redirect "Chapter Fourteen" to the end? What was the point of a full blown afd? Just a thought. Please don't attack me. Clamster5 15:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • First off, I have a strong feeling that this page won't be deleted, just merged, as that seems to be the general consensus.
    • I also noticed that you removed all of Chapter Fourteen's information from The End. That alone proves that all the relevant information of it could easily be condensed into two paragraphs and that this article is entirely redundant.
    • If I had merged it or redirected it without any general consensus from anyone, don't you think someone would revert it?
    • I just feel that an article devoted to one chapter is unneccessary. Its not a seperate story. Formatting gimmicks aside, what is in the plot that couldn't be described in The End?#--CyberGhostface 19:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply to Above Comment Deleting the page implies that you want the subject not to be covered and when someone types in "Chapter Fourteen" for there to be no page. But even you seem to think the chapter needs a mention, a paragraph, something that signifies its existence. So why didn't you have a discussion on both talk pages, stick the template that says "it has been proposed that these page be merged", wait patiently for at least a week or so, and then merge giving Chapter Fourteen the coverage you feel it deserves in The End article? Honestly why? I don't want to get you angry/upset/acting like 5 year old. Please just answer why you proposed to delete instead of merge? Clamster5 00:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting the page means that I do believe the subject should be covered, just in the article for The End as one chapter does not deserve its own article.
And whats there to merge? Chapter Fourteen is already covered in the main article! Excluding the fact that the general consensus is merge, so chances are thas what the result will be.
And if you still have to ask why I want this deleted then I guess I haven't made myself clear for the last three days. I've said nearly everything there is to say on the subject.--CyberGhostface 00:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge.
  1. There are 13 books in the series, each with their own title and ISBN. This fourteenth chapter is not a book and does not have a title/ISBN.
  2. The fourteenth chapter is specifically a chapter. You cannot buy a book by Lemony Snicket called "Chapter Fourteen".
  3. Any information in "chapter fourteen" is also applicable to "The End." --JCoug 20:26, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into The End, and designate a section. bibliomaniac15 Review? 00:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another Comment I think this comes down to a matter of semantics. Are we defining a book as being a physical entity, or are we defining a book as a logical entity? There are 13 physical books, 14 logical books. I do think the author intended there to be 14 "books" but the publisher has done 13 books. If the publisher were to publish a separate book 14, then I could justify listing it in an encyclopedia as a separate entity. As it is now, it is merely a section of book 13 and therefore should fall under the page about book 13. Therefore, I think we should merge the pages. --JCoug 02:15, 10 November 2006 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chapter_Fourteen&oldid=1137694212"