Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cha-Ka

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 Keep. Notable episodes in a notable series. Malinaccier (talk) 01:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cha-Ka[edit]

Cha-Ka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Much like other series, individual episodes of Land of the Lost are not inherently notable. I propose that this and the following other episodes be merged into the List of Land of the Lost episodes pages and deleted as non-notable.

Other episode pages:

Delete. not notable.DonaldDuck (talk) 04:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a batch of episodes just after you tagged. Sorry for doing so; this page auto-created, and it took about 5 minutes to add all the episode titles in and get the links working.Tyrenon (talk) 04:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NOT#PLOT. Above listed articles are purely recap of the show and encyclopedia is not the place to find such information. No real world notability established for the episodes. Corpx (talk) 06:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOT#PLOT specifies that "articles on fictional works containing little more than a plot summary should be improved to provide more balanced coverage that includes real-world context", not that they should be deleted. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pending the lack of any real world notability, these articles cannot be improved beyond their plot summaries. Corpx (talk) 23:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Ruigeroeland (talk) I don't understand: why are episodes of other series notable? I mean, all episodes of "The Office" are featured on wikipedia. Why are these notable and these are not? The Office is a hot series right now, but this one might have been back in the day. If it is not notable enough though, I guess the hard work this user put into this must be preserved by adding the info on the page with the episode list.

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ruigoreland, I've been wondering the same thing. I honestly don't think every episode of any series meets the prescribed standards for being encyclopedic. Some shows will have a few that are encyclopedic, some will have a decent number (MASH probably has a decent stack, for example, but nowhere near the 200+ episodes the series had).Tyrenon (talk) 12:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Maybe making a list featuring all the info would be the best thing for most series, but I guess same thing would apply for "The Office", "Family Guy" and "The Simpsons". Making an article about every episode because the series is popular now and not doing so because a series is older seems a bit unfair. I mean, if Seinfeld or the X-Files would premiere this year, it would have an article for every episode, but because these are older series, it is not allowed to make an article about every episode. This seems somewhat strange to me. Ruigeroeland (talk)
  • Comment / Keep all. I have to agree that there is an unfair standard for articles depending on whether they are recent or older. The argument that there are no third party sources is only because not much appears on the article. But undoubtedly in 1974 reviews were written, statistics taken, and of course every episode had its own creative conception. The problem is that such information all came out before the internet, and finding all of this is no easy task. I tend to agree that some episodes should be kept for each TV series…for example, in this series, the episodes "Cha-Ka", "The Stranger", and (the not yet created) "Circle" all deserve recognition. But discussions about Wikipedia policy are not going to be decided here, of course. And I tend to think that, as Ruigeroeland said, if other television series get every episode, why not Land of the Lost, which is a cult classic? — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The question of whether or not to merge these is primarily a matter of style and has no place here. Myself, I do not care all that much, as long as the content is kept. In practice, that means keeping the articles to avoid gradual removal down to tv guide status. NOT TV GUIDE and NO TEASERS is violated much more by the excessively brief episode sections, not by the separate articles. DGG (talk) 23:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The articles may be wanting in content and quality, but the solution is obviously not to delete them.--Jpwrunyan (talk) 01:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but also admit that NPOV is a total sham The one TV episode in history that might be notable enough to warrant its own article is the episode of Maude where she get an abortion, although I'm probably dating myself with that one! This article is not notable at all and should be deleted. But also look at Tomorrow Is Yesterday and tell me it meets notability. The implicit reason other posters have not suggested cleaning house is because they know the fan community would defend even the most inane Star Trek article. Let's just admit that we keep un-notable articles on shows we like, but not on ones we don't. And this is one we don't.RevelationDirect (talk) 13:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I tend to agree with you on this point. There are a lot of episodes that really ought to be merged into seasonal lists, both because they're not notable in and of themselves (paper or not, there is a line somewhere) and because there are dedicated wikis to load the details into. Alas, to quote someone else, it's like Klinger trying to get a Section 8.Tyrenon (talk) 05:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep notable show written by some very notable science fiction writers. Since the articles are being lumped together We can't discuss individual episodes. I would recommend redirecting them to a list, and working on the more notable episodes there. This could be handled without going through AFD. Ridernyc (talk) 01:06, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Cha-Ka and The Stranger (Land of the Lost); Neutral, leaning towards merge on the rest. I did a Google Books search to see if there was any critical discussion of the episodes of this series; I found this book, which has substantial discussion of the series but not much on individual episodes. While I'm generally inclusionist, the apparent absence of reliable sources discussing these episodes means that I don't oppose merging them into a list of episodes. However, there was some material for "Cha-Ka" and "The Stranger", which I have added to the articles; I think these establish notability for these two episodes. (The Erickson book also has some material which could/should be added to other episode articles, but I think these are the only ones in this batch which get close treatment.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:08, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the two that Josiah mentions, merge the rest unless sources can be found for them as well, in which case keep those too. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 15:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added sources to The Sleestak God, Downstream (Land of the Lost), Album (Land of the Lost), and Skylons. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 21:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (my vote is above ^). According to information I found while searching, the DVDs all include commentaries, interviews, and other information — of course, this is second party, not third party, sources, but the inclusion of this material would merit "Conception" or "Production" sections to the articles, making them more encyclopedic. In other words, the sources everyone is asking for are out there, they just take someone willing to dig deep. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 21:11, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These are notable. This was a very popular children's series. Most children episodes are listed. If you delete these, you need to delete ALL.... General Eisenhower (talk · contribs) 21:22, 11 June 2009 (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/Cha-Ka&oldid=1137690061"