Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Service codenames: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Groggy Dice (talk | contribs) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (17 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''. [[User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me|Can't sleep, clown will eat me]] 02:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
===[[Secret Service codenames]]===
:{{la|Secret Service codenames}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Service codenames|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 February 24#{{anchorencode:Secret Service codenames}}|View log]])</noinclude>
<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists|list of Lists-related deletions]]. </small> <small>-- [[User:Mermaid from the Baltic Sea|Mermaid from the Baltic Sea]] 06:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)</small>
Not notable and no [[WP:RS]], Contested Prod [[User:DXRAW|DXRAW]] 09:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' Perhaps the article could be better sourced, but it is useful information I would expect to find in an encyclopedia. Improve the article, but don't delete it. [[User:Johnn 7|Johnn 7]] 10:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Useful to have this data in one place, though it needs to be linked and catted so people can actually find it. --[[User:Groggy Dice|<span style="color:indigo; border:thin solid cyan; background:aliceblue">Groggy Dice</span>]] <span style="border:thin solid gold;">[[User talk:Groggy Dice|T]] | [[Special:Contributions/Groggy Dice|C]]</span> 14:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Needs better sourcing, but that should be relatively easy to find. Agree with the above two editors - this is useful reference information and it makes sense for it to have its own article. [[User:JavaTenor|JavaTenor]] 17:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per nom. [[WP:USEFUL]] is not a valid criterion for inclusion. [[User:Otto4711|Otto4711]] 22:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Encyclopedic , IMO, and now sourced by recent edits. [[User:A Train|A Train]] <sup>[[User_talk:A_Train|<span style="font-size:smaller; color:darkblue;">take the</span>]]</sup> 22:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' The source that is being used lists a [[Spooks|TV Program]] codename for [[Queen Elizabeth II]] That shows how it does not pass [[WP:RS]] [[User:DXRAW|DXRAW]] 23:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I believe the discussion here is about whether this is encyclopedic or not. If it is poorly sourced, that should be fixed, but it isn't a critera for deletion. [[User:Johnn 7|Johnn 7]] 19:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' The point i'm trying to make is that it the sources is incorrect and thus should be removed leaving something which is unsourced and also thus leaving nothing there so in a nutshell there is no article. [[User:DXRAW|DXRAW]] 20:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', but ''not'' per nom. This is at the moment just a list, and not a useful source of information on things such as how the codenames are given or when they are given. However, I am certain that a point like "some of the information in this article is wrong" isn't a reason to delete it, as that's not what [[WP:RS]] says. It says that reliable sources must be found. So ignore the WP:RS part of the prod nomination. [[User:Wittyname|Wittyname]] 21:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' but expand it. It could be a useful and interesting list. [[User:Kolindigo|Kolindigo]] 07:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. It's a list, but [[WP:LIST|a list is valid WP content]] (as opposed to [[WP:NOT#IINFO]]). The topic itself ("why is this information collected together?") here isn't OR (I just added some more cites that Secret Service actually does codenames, not just a Hollywood construct) and the scope is explicit and well-defined. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] 18:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
**'''...but rename/move'''. On further thought, if this is primarily a list page (as opposed to a page about Secret Service operations that happens to include some examples), it should probably be named [[List of Secret Service codenames]]. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] 07:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per reasons given so far. [[User:Mermaid from the Baltic Sea|Mermaid from the Baltic Sea]] 05:42, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. These are kind of obscure, but interesting and I believe worthy of inclusion. I have a book somewhere with more of these in them, I'll add them later on, perhaps. They have codes for more than just people. --[[User:UsaSatsui|UsaSatsui]] 10:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||