Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exo filmography

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 delete. There's a lot of random threads here, but unless I'm misreading something, this boils down to a unanimous consensus to delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:18, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exo filmography[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Aside from being 100% unsourced, this article, supposedly a filmography for the group Exo, is a list of TV/film roles by individuals within the group plus a list of variety show and radio appearances. The former should be handled in the individuals' articles/sections and the latter has been already established as not appropriate for Wikipedia. So the article serves no remaining purpose. Shinyang-i (talk) 01:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Shinyang-i (talk) 01:17, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I split this article from Exo videography before I realized a filmography is often included on a musician's videography page. Exo's cameo appearance in To the Beautiful You, and their own web drama and variety shows (EXO Next Door, EXO's Showtime, XOXO EXO, and 90:2014) can either be listed on Exo's main article or their videography. Anything about individual members should be in their own articles/subsections. Random86 (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Random86 (talk) 06:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge back to Exo (band) per being better for our readers when offered contextually in the band's article. But Shinyang-i is incorrect. Separate filmography lists ARE allowed (IE: Tom Cruise filmography)... just not in this case. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC) Striking. No need t merge what can be added later. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe when Shinyang-i said "the latter has been already established as not appropriate for Wikipedia" they were refering to the "list of variety show and radio appearances". Peachywink (talk) 17:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He said having separate filmographies "has been already established as not appropriate for Wikipedia". Per policy and guideline that sweeping condemnation is not true, unless he wishes to modify his statement to be what your infer. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, once again, I most certainly did not say that, and I did not make a "sweeping condemnation" of anything. I don't even see how you could get that. I said "the latter has already been established...". "The latter" refers to the latter thing mentioned, "a list of variety show and radio appearances." It seems clear to everyone but you. Please, read carefully, and don't derail or ruin AFD discussions by making false allegations. Shinyang-i (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be mad Schmidt, , but I felt this might be needed. English lesson of the day: when a person says "the latter" it means you have to go look at there previous statement and find a point where it has listed two seperate things. This could be objects like "apples and oranges" or ideas like "love or lust" but they are always separated by some form of connecting conjunction. In this case it would be this part of Shinyang-i's sentence "a list of TV/film roles by individuals within the group plus a list of variety show and radio appearances". Now a person might think the "and" is the break point for the two ideas being presented here but it is actually the word "plus" that breaks them apart since plus can be though of as another way to say "and in addition". So when a person says "the latter they are refering to the second part of the statement and in this case that would be "a list of variety show and radio appearances". You misread, this is not a debate, it is a fact. I hope that helped to clarify. :) Peachywink (talk) 03:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the clarification: Guideline lesson of the day: read MOS:LISTS, WP:LISTPURP and WP:SALAT. Even if something is thought trivial and unimportant or non-notable by someone, a list of a group's "variety show and radio appearances" are not summarily disallowed. Lacking sources for an individual list article, they can still be mentioned in other articles as the appearance sources itself. And the title of the list up for deletion is properly Exo filmography, not Exo variety show and radio appearances. And I'm not mad at all. Out. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He/she was trying to help you understand what "latter" meant. Point missed yet again. Anyway, you are not really contributing anything to this AFD discussion and you've really upset me with your untrue claims about me. So if it's not too much trouble just go away, please. Shinyang-i (talk) 05:38, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The relevant group material can be added to the main article or Exo videography(...but that page has some issues such as it not being linked in the main article and also has no references.) Anyways, as for this page, it has no good reason to exist, it offers no prose or context to show how any of it is relevant to the group, and is just a list of shows. Peachywink (talk) 17:04, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it can, a place where it has context... but I've already struck my saying just that. And adding "the latter (variety show and radio appearances)" is not disallowed... specially if those appearances brought the group coverage and greater notability. WP:ENT Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 04:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a place where context is important. This is kpop. Nearly every kpop artist goes on hundreds of variety shows. There have been repeated and extensive discussions among people who edit kpop articles about whether or not humongous lists of every variety show an artist was ever on belongs on Wikipedia. The consensus has repeatedly been NO. Such lists are meaningless and unencyclopedic because they do neither of the things you suggest; they are just huge lists. This is not the case in every situation in the world but in kpop it nearly always is. There have been discussions about when it is appropriate to list or discuss an artist's variety show appearances but gigantic lists like the ones on these filmographies? No. Many very experienced editors, including admins, have been party to these discussions. So yes, it has been established that in kpop (which is what these all are) lists of every variety show appearance by an artist is not appropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Thank you for bringing up that point, but in this case it's not relevant. Shinyang-i (talk) 05:53, 26 March 2015 (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.