Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sally (Flight of the Conchords)

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. Merging (which is suggested in my opinion) can be done by editoral process. seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sally (Flight of the Conchords)

These articles contain little more than plot summaries of the episodes in question. WP:NOT states that such articles "...should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development and historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot."

None of these episodes appear to be particularly notable, except for possibly the pilot. WP:SERIAL provides some sample criteria, none of which the other episodes appear to meet.

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all episodes of the same television series, and all have the same issues as the original article:

FiddyCent (talk) 09:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Business Time...erm...I mean Merge to Flight of the Conchords. There's already an Episode list on the main page and a bit more on each episode can be added there. Wait a second, doesn't this violate the ArbCom Injunction on AfDs relating to TV episodes and characters? Doc Strange^{Telepathic Messages}Strange Frequencies 13:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the injunction only stops us from actually closing these discussions with anything other than "keep". People can still nominate and discuss them all they want, but unfortunately this is getting AfD a little backlogged. ArbCom should be finishing up soon - they only need one more vote to close the case before this injunction goes away, but it's taking a while. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. —Pixelface (talk) 16:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, episodes of a notable TV show. --Pixelface (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all I've seen hundreds of "plot-only" TV episode articles on Wikipedia, and despite the nominator's assertion, these articles actually contain plenty of other information and very brief summaries. The ones I've looked at do have real-world sourcing and references, so I don't think a blanket nomination was a good idea in this case. --Canley (talk) 23:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are well referenced articles, but my issue with these articles is more of a notability concern rather than one of poor referencing. Most or all of the references are confirming plot details or backing up which songs were played. The sourcing may be real-world, but the content is not. FiddyCent (talk) 06:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's clearly no consensus or guideline one way or the other regarding the blanket notability (or lack thereof) of individual episode articles on Wikipedia, which is why we had the recent ArbCom case and it seems to be one of the major battlelines between deletionists and inclusionists. Until there is consensus on the matter, all we can go by is the quality of the articles, and to my mind, the quality of these articles is good enough. --Canley (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all As original author of these articles, I'm admittedly biased. However, I'd like to think that there is more substance to these articles than mere episode summaries. The show is full of interesting cultural references, most of which have been documented in these articles. It's hard to find sources of critical analysis and historical context on a television series that is so new. Who is to say which series become cultural phenomenons? One day these articles written in a contemprary context may prove valuable resources when and if these series ever become historically notable. BigBadaboom0 (talk) 03:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that an encyclopedia should have an individual detailed article on each episode of every TV series which might become a historically notable cultural phenomenon in the future. Perhaps setting up a Flight of the Conchords wiki with a free service like Wikia would be the way to go, if you're keen enough to go into detail on every episode? FiddyCent (talk) 06:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the question is where do you draw the line? Are these episodes as notable as, say, List of Star Trek: The Original Series episodes? Possibly not, but if you tried to delete those, there's going to be a much tougher fight, even though most of the Trek ones have arguably less content than these FotC ones :) BigBadaboom0 (talk) 14:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all. Not only are episode pages notable, they are also very useful. The pages will most certainly be expanded with references and trivia as time goes on. --Liface (talk) 17:25, 12 March 2008 (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.