Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Several Monty Python sketches: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:25, 26 September 2007

Revision as of 00:14, 27 September 2007

Line 50:

**The major difference between that discussion and this one is that a source (however useful it may have been) was provided. To use the legal term, I don't think the precedent is "on all fours" with this AfD. [[User:BigHaz|BigHaz]] - [[User_talk:BigHaz|Schreit mich an]] 22:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

*'''Comment''', I have added a script and video of [[Anne Elk's Theory on Brontosauruses]] similar to how it is done for [[The Philosophers' Football Match]] which was a keep and I have also added the reference I mentioned above which "Philophers'" didn't have, so I believe this article should also be a keep. Other than this particular edit, I am not an author of these articles but as I mentioned, I believe that time is warranted to give the author(s) a chance to beef up the articles similar to how I've beefed up Anne Elk. [[User:Pocopocopocopoco|Pocopocopocopoco]] 02:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

*'''Keep all''' or at least renominate separately. Monty Python is very famous and thus all of its sketches should be at least mentioned. [[User:JIP|<font color="#CC0000">J</font><font color="#00CC00">I</font><font color="#0000CC">P</font>]] | [[User talk:JIP|Talk]] 04:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

**There's a considerable difference between "mentioned" and "have articles written about them", though. [[User:BigHaz|BigHaz]] - [[User_talk:BigHaz|Schreit mich an]] 04:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

*'''List individually''' and (those who do it or are contemplating doing so), please refrain from responding to every comment or opinion that disagrees with yours. It's bad form, intimidating to some, and not good evidence of your individual brilliance. Better use of that brilliance would be to improve the articles in question, seek out whatever you think is missing and add it, etc. [[User:Lou Sander|Lou Sander]] 12:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)