Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of The Simpsons episodes by theme and User talk:Susvolans: Difference between pages

Revision as of 14:26, 27 October 2005

Revision as of 16:10, 22 November 2005

Line 1:

{{add|Add a new comment here}}

===[[List of The Simpsons episodes by theme]]===

'''Delete''' because

== Archives ==

'''[[WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information|Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information]]''':

[[User talk:Susvolans/Archive 1|August 2004 to September 2005]]

''Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia.''

== Thank you ==

This list is pure [[Wikipedia:Fancruft|fancruft]] (yes, I know some people here do not like the term but this is the epitome of it) and is of no encyclopedic value whatsoever - I doubt categorizing [[The Simpsons|Simpsons]] episodes by theme serves any encyclopedic purpose.

Thank you for speaking up on the behalf of a user you did not even know. I appreciate your efforts for justice. Should you have any lingering concerns, I encourage you to come to my talk page and join the dialog there on what has occured. Discussion is the best way to calm stormy waters. [[User:TheChief|<font color=#0000ff>The</font><font color=#ff7f00>Chief</font>]] [[User_talk:TheChief|(<font color=#0000ff>Pow</font><font color=#ff7f00>Wow</font>)]] 17:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

There are hundreds of [http://www.snpp.com/ fansites] out there who are more suitable for this topic than Wikipedia.

==Ignore all rules==

[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 19:40, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

First, obviously, if rule 5 were deleted, it would become four pillars rather than five. I think that any change to the four/five pillars should be well discussed on its talk page first. Failure to do so would be to ignore all rules, which could be seen as [[WP:POINT]].

* '''Delete''' - I like the Simpsons, but sometimes you can go too far. Too much Simpson cruft on here anyway. --[[User:MacRusgail|MacRusgail]] 20:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

* '''Strong Keep''' - This article is an invaluable source of information for anybody trying to locate a Simpsons episode with a particular theme. It is very detailed and accurate as well as being a list that's unique to the web, as far as I know. -- [[User:Kaizersoze|Kaizersoze]] 20:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC) ''(creator of article)''

I personally think that the five pillars document is fine, because it says that there are no rules other than those listed, and the writers' rules of engagement are one of the pillars. The real problem is that Ignore All Rules is the wrong summary of the guideline, and is sufficiently wrong as to be a destructive title, because it can easily be read as meaning that one can ignore civility. [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] 18:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

::'''Ammendment''' - I also believe that with the 350+ individual articles on Simpsons episodes, there should be an article categorizing them, and this seems like the best way. The only other option I see would be to create categories for every theme ("Homer themed Simpsons episodes" category, "Marge themed Simpsons episodes" category, "Vacation themed Simpsons episodes" category, etc.) - [[User:Kaizersoze|Kaizersoze]] 20:45, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

:::There is an ongoing discussion about whether all lists of TV series are worthy/relevant enough to be included in Wikipedia at the moment, this might interest you: [[Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Television episodes]] --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 20:57, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Susvolans - I'm just taking baby steps for now [[User:Redkaty|Redkaty]] 14:38, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

:'''Comment''' - I think in all due fairness to the [[WP:AFD#AfD etiquette|AfD etiquette]] it should be stated that you are the creator of the article in question. --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 20:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' - Heh. If you're the creator, Kaizersoze, nice job, but why not just put it on a fansite or something? You're right that it's unique to the web, but Wikipedia is not a haven for rogue sites. Just submit it to SNPP or something. [[User:Devotchka|Devotchka]] 20:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

==Final decision==

*'''Delete''' (originally'''Weak Keep''') - This is a great list but would be more suited to a fansite, not Wikipedia. On the other hand, if it can't be found anywhere else, I'm not sure we should delete it yet. [[User:Devotchka|Devotchka]] 20:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Louis Epstein]] case [[User:Raul654|&rarr;Raul654]] 02:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

:'''Comment''' -I wouldn't have nominated if I thought it could be expanded to something useful. Besides, letting it stay justifies other articles of the same kin to have their place here (List of StarTrek episodes by theme? List of Seinfeld episodes by theme?) --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 20:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

:Another '''Comment''' - As for other places where this could be listed, [http://www.simpedia.5gigs.com/index.php?title=Main_Page there are Simpsons Wikis] out there for this. My point was that Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, as a collection of knowledge, not a pure data bin. --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 20:42, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] ==

*'''Delete''', per [[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]]. Wikipedia is not here to see how many different ways someone can slice and dice information.--[[User:Isotope23|Isotope23]] 20:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' Simpsoncruft (another neocruftism?). There is no theoretical limit to the number of different ways The Simpsons episodes can be sliced and diced, but these are the realm of fandom not an encyclopaedia. - [[User:Just zis Guy, you know?|Just zis Guy, you know?]] 20:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&curid=39805&diff=28415528&oldid=28413773 revert; the claim that all five pillars are unchangeable has no foundation in policy], why is it there then? Is the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars]], wrong? -- [[User:Zondor|Zondor]] 17:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' per Just zis Guy, you know. [[User:Bjelleklang|Bjelleklang]] - [[User_talk:Bjelleklang|talk]] 21:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete'''. I would say "meh" to be funny, but that might come off as bad Wikiquette. The truth of the matter is that someone put a good deal of time into a page that doesn't have a place on Wikipedia. --[[User:Jacqui M Schedler|<font color="#663366">Jacqui]]</font>^{[[User_talk:Jacqui M Schedler|★}]] 23:28, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

== Updated poll ==

:I think it could be saved pretty easily to one of the many wikis for the Simpsons. The formatting isn't anything difficult to migrate. If anyone is interested in this thing, I'd suggest to make copies of this article elsewhere online, no matter whether the vote goes delete or keep. --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 00:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I have completely changed the poll. Please see [[Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (years in titles)/Poll]] --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion]] [[User talk:AllyUnion|(talk)]] 02:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete'''. I wouldn't object to deleting the Simpsons episode articles, as well. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] 00:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' per [[User:Just zis Guy, you know?|Just zis Guy, you know?]], too many themes. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 00:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

== curly quotes ==

* '''Strong Keep''' Seriously. This is one of the interesting pages that makes Wikipedia such a fun place to visit.

* '''Delete''', add it to one of the indie SimpsonsWikis. [[User:Andrew Levine|Andrew Levine]] 01:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

May I ask why you moved [["—All You Zombies—"]] to [[“—All You Zombies—”]]? &mdash; [[User:Flamingspinach|flamingspinach]] | [[User_talk:Flamingspinach|(talk)]] 06:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

* '''Strong Keep''' Most people voting for 'Delete' on this page are not huge Simpsons fans. Take 'Carnildo' who posted 'I wouldn't object to deleting the Simpsons episode articles, as well'. Said opinions should be disregarded, as they are from sources whom wouldn't appreciate any article of 'The Simpsons'. The fact is, this article is an organised, and very useful summary of Simpsons episodes which is user friendly, and is great for reference, which is what Wikipedia is all about. [[User:DM|DM]] 12:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

* '''Strong Keep''' As others have said, this article is an invaluable source of information. ''Scott''.

== class="wikitable" ==

* '''Comment''': Because the two (!) users above have not done this, I want to state that the Afd etiquette states: ''Sign any recommendation or comment you add, by adding this at the end: <nowiki>~~~~.</nowiki>'' Also, my argument was about Wikipedia's status as an encyclopedia, a collection of knowledge, not any fan data anybody could possibly think of. I am a big Simspons fan myself (earlier seasons), but that does not change the validity of the one major [[WP:WWIN]]s I listed in my initial post: ''Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information''. There has got to be a reasonable border between what is general useful and interesting knowledge and simply information for diehard fans - otherwise Wikipedia will welcome all data bins one that can possibly be come up with. --[[User:Zerofoks|zerofoks]] 14:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't know how, but why would you want to anyway? [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 14:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

:Aha, so you mean find occurances where it was expanded when it used [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Prettytable&oldid=23029079 this] revision of the prettytable. In which case the only way I think you could find them would be to get someone to use an SQL query on the database dump, but I don't know how successful that would be. At the moment I am not capable of doing this, but plently of other people are. [[User:Bluemoose|Martin]] 16:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)