Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of problems solved by MacGyver (2nd nomination)

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 No Consensus between those who see it just as unencyclopedic plot summaries and the opposing view that it is verifiable (and have identified some sources) and can have real life context. Davewild (talk) 11:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of problems solved by MacGyver[edit]

Largely originial research and synthesis, fails WP:N, is unattributable and unsalvageably unencyclopedic. If it can be trankswikied to a MacGuyver wiki, it should be. Cumulus Clouds 04:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to List of MacGyver episodes. The character's resourcefulness is a significant aspect of the series and how he gets out of problems is (for me, ahem) the highlight of an episode. However, this list cannot stand on its own two feet for the reasons given in the nomination, but a "problems solved" column can easily be added to the LOE (in the same way List of House episodes has a "diagnosis" column). Brad 13:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I withdraw that, as I didn't notice how many "problems solved" were listed for each episode. Brad 13:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 18:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's a lot of content that can be considered to be the essence of MacGyver. Trivially verifiable per the actual television program. Further, Wikipedia is not paper, so we're not exactly worried about running out of space. -- Masterzora 19:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as largely unverifiable, trivial, and indiscriminate info. Title is also very POV. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:59, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
MacGyver's inventiveness -- his ability to get out of any situation with "baling wire and a pocket knife" -- is pretty much the character's defining characteristic in popular consciousness. The list as it stands does not, however, do a good job of justifying the subject's notability. I note that it is being continuously worked-on; if the current editors were to, say, cannibalize sources from the main article that explain this notability (in, say, the lead) AND were to start explicitly, instead of implicitly, citing the episodes where MacGyver got inventive, I'll vote Keep. If they don't by the end of the AfD (and I really hope they do) I will change that to a reluctant delete. For the nominator's concerns for verifiability, I point out that per WP:WAF, for events/plot of a work of fiction, the work itself is a valid and acceptable primary source. (I share the above POV concerns about the title, btw.) —Quasirandom 20:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)\[reply]
Given the changes to the article so far, I now definitely vote keep -- and hope the editors continue improving it in this manner. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:Plot, WP:WAF, WP:Fict, WP:RS. Basically a long list of plot elements with no real world conetext, that relies on primary sources. Ridernyc 21:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article is verifiable per WP:WAF. As for notability, the list doesn't do the best job of showing it in its current incarnation, but I feel that the article can show notability per Quasirandom. --Goobergunch|? 21:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The relevant real world context is in the main MacGyver article, if the people working on this article could include some of the real world information in this article, that would be great. It is OK to source the actual problems that MacGyver solves from the TV programme itself, per WP:WAF#Primary_information. I suggest moving the article to List of MacGyverisms. Bláthnaid 21:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki and delete This is perfect for a fan wiki, but totally unsuitable in content and presentation for wikipedia. Major WP:NOT#PLOT and WP:FICT issues and more. That Macguyver was inventive can be said and illustrated in two short paragraphs in the main article, so listing every occurence in every episode is completely unnecessary. (I checked, but I couldn't find a macguyver wikia. This doesn't mean that this article should remain on wikipedia.) – sgeureka ^t•c 21:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak neutral I agree that most of the material (In episode X, MacGyver does Y) is verifiable using primary sources, and there is nothing wrong with that. The subject is notable, and notable for this very thing. However, there is a lot of OR in the article (which could in principle be excised) and silly icons, and this level of detail does border on a trivia collection. — brighterorange (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have Transwikied this material to the Macgyver Wiki. That article was originally copy and pasted to the MacWiki from this article, so I have updated it with the current version. Cumulus Clouds 22:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Masterzora. Trivially verifiable. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 00:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Funny how everyone ignores WP:Plot, article hopelessly fails policy. Ridernyc 00:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Except, it's not plot summaries -- it's specific events. And more context and sourcing in the lead would make it quite defintely not all plot. —Quasirandom 01:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

call them what ever you want it's a list of plot elements from a tv show.Ridernyc 02:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quoth WP:NOT#PLOT: "not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot" -- these aren't detailed, and they aren't the whole plot. —Quasirandom 04:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you have to be joking. Ridernyc 06:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but remove the annoying little icons next to each episode because, well, they're annoying. Coccyx Bloccyx 00:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nominator. DJ Creamity^{Oh Yeah!} 00:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't delete the List until it is archived elsewhere. comment from 71.202.20.183 (talk · contribs) that was left on this nomination's talkpage. Bláthnaid 10:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A book [1] has been published that is entirely about MacGyverisms. This shows that MacGyverisms have real-world notability, and can be sourced from reliable secondary sources. Bláthnaid 10:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still dose not change the fact that article has no real world context and is just summary of plot elements. Ridernyc 10:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, there is real world context in the main MacGyver article that can be moved into this article. Here is some more real world context: [2] [3] [4]. There is a cute book here called What Would Macgyver Do?: True Stories of Improvised Genius in Everyday Life. (By the way, I can't get the blasted theme tune out of my head now :p) Bláthnaid 10:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ten Pound Hammer, and sgeureka. Holy god, delete. Xihr (talk) 03:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I actually came looking on wiki for a list of some of the ways MacGyver solved problems. Verifying is trivial for anyone who watches the actual episodes, and being a work of pop fiction, I don't think a few errors or omissions matter. Instead, just add a note to the beginning encouraging people to further improve the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wxidea (talk • contribs) 04:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Seriously, is there any real value to be had in this? Achromatic (talk) 08:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep- per Masterzora -- Penubag 01:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is essentially a collection of plot snippets, not an encyclopedic article. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 02:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some real world context about how the creative team behind MacGyver chose the problems. Some were suggested by scientists, some from a write-in competition, and I've read that G. Gordon Liddy even suggested some. (Unfortunately, I didn't read the Liddy part in a RS, so I can't add it to the article yet.) There is more information available eg here. More real world context that could be added include whether the MacGyverisms worked in real life (some didn't to prevent children from injuring themselves), which could be sourced using the book I mentioned above. If the article is kept, I will trim down the plot elements. Bláthnaid 09:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Are you serious? How did this even survive a first AfD? ➪HiDrNick! 02:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reliable sources exist, and you gotta love these: The Unofficial MacGyver How-to Handbook: Actual Working Tricks as Seen on TV's MacGyver and What Would MacGyver Do?: True Stories of Improvised Genius in Everyday Life. Plenty of real-world context there. DHowell (talk) 04:38, 8 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.