Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of running gags

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 of the debate was keep or no consensus. Take your pick. Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 11:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of running gags[edit]

nn, cruft. Timwi 14:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Split into separate articles for each running gag. Kappa 15:28, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And what do you suppose should be in such articles? The gag itself can be described in one line and that's pretty much it... - Mgm|^(talk) 08:30, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with List of catch phrases as a precedent. Tonywalton | Talk 16:42, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tony's precedent. If any individual running gag can grow over 40 k, split them. Karmafist 17:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to individual articles (that's funny; I thought I voted on this already). --Jacquelyn Marie 19:05, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as preferable to seperate articles for each running gag --TimPope 20:53, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge with relevant on the film, book or TV show involved per WP:FICT. Only make a seperate article if the article on the film, book or TV show gets too large and the section itself is sizable enough for a seperate article. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - unmaintainable.--MacRusgail 19:20, 20 October 2005 (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.