Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buffyverse rare promos

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 --JForget 00:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buffyverse rare promos[edit]

A fan piece not suitable for a general purpose encyclopedia. kingboyk (talk) 18:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Two things kill this article: 1. Define rare without violating WP:NOR or WP:NPOV. Can't do it, can ya. 2. The fact the article has to include a statement explaining why it exists and who might be interested in it already has several strikes against it from a notability perspective. If any of these promos become widely known or notable, then they can be mentioned in the article for the appropriate series. 23skidoo (talk) 03:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "Rare" doesn't violate NOR or NPOV as long as multiple reliable sources agree that something is rare. Copies of Action Comics #1 are rare, especially in good condition. No point of view or original research there as long as multiple reliable sources agree. Rray (talk) 23:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CitiCat^♫ 00:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article can be summarized as "Buffy and Angel had commercials that may be interesting for fans". And even that sentence is too trivial to be merged. – sgeureka ^t•c 00:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - I am inclined to agree with this articles topic being not suitable for an encyclopedia, but I can't see anything in WP:NOT which would kill it? Sting_au Talk 00:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete basically just plot sumaries for non-notable tv ads. Ridernyc (talk) 03:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the most important policy statement, The Five Pillars, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia written for the benefit of its readers. It includes elements of general encyclopedias, specialized encyclopedias, and almanacs. The proposed deletion is therefore based upon a misconception of the fundamental nature of this project, which is to cover both general and specialized material for which there is a readership. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Colonel Warden. Rray (talk) 13:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:NOT#PLOT as plot summaries of ads with no real-world notability. Buffy-cruft. Noting that the Five Pillars are not policy but are instead a summary of policy. Otto4711 (talk) 00:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:NOT, WP:CRUFT --Shark face 217 02:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not meet WP:N guidelines. Referenced materials are links to the existence of the commercials but not the notability. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 15:58, 17 December 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.