Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/20 to 1: Spectacular Dummy Spits

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

20 to 1: Spectacular Dummy Spits

Not much content, explains nothing and is completely unreferenced and uncategorised. —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 06:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as nominator —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 05:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note to nominator: you may be interested in these. MER-C 06:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What are you saying - that i should nominate the rest for deletion, or that because all the other episodes of the television series exist that this one should be kept? Thank you for your comment, but, also, what is your position on the AFD nom, if you would care to give one? —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 07:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an opinion yet. I'm just saying that there's other stuff out there that may be deletable. It's up to you to decide what to do with them. MER-C 08:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Borders on nonsense, since the article does not explain what a "dummy spit" is or why it is notable. Is it a list of people who spit on a dummy? Were somehow spit on by a dummy? Roasted a dummy on a spit? Something to do with a card game? Can't speak so they just communicate by spitting????Edison 14:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Added to the article the info that in Australia they call a baby pacifier a "dummy" so a "dummy spit" is an infantile tantrum. Edison 16:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. 20 to 1 is a notable show, but I absolutely cannot see how any individual episodes would be, even given the propensity to have articles for every episode of series such as Buffy or The Simpsons. The show itself is about lists, so an article on an episode will merely copy that list, and so is either (a) listcruft or (b) possibly risking a bit of copyright infringement (if compared to, say, an article copying a Rolling Stone list of Top 100 songs which IIRC isn't allowed). Confusing Manifestation 02:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this article and all other individual 20 to 1 articles.--cj | talk 03:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It seems that they rotate the various categories of 20 to 1 so this may be superceded in a few months time. Capitalistroadster 03:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. And ALL other 20 to 1 articles. episodes are non-notable and we don't want to copy the subjective and often downright wrong content presented on the show as fact. Rimmeraj 03:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 03:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 20 to 1 (Television series). While episodes are non-notable, the series is a reasonable documentation of Australian (and to a lesser extent, international) culture - or pop-culture. Ga rr ie 04:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nn television episode. Lankiveil 11:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Merge as per Lankveil. The series is notable, individual episodes are no more notable than individual episodes of Temptation. --Mattinbgn/^talk 22:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Knowing something about the background of how the show came to be, I am strongly suspicious that this could be a subtle form of advertising for the Australian network on which the show airs, which has been having its own unique brand of troubles in recent times. I suggest deleting this and all other 20 to 1 articles other than the one on the show itself (per CJ, Rimmeraj, Conman, and possibly the nominator). Orderinchaos 03:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've spent some time categorising these, but I've never been happy with the reproduction of straight out lists from the episodes of the show. I'd be OK with deleting them all. --Canley 04:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete NN rubbish NBeale 05:38, 23 April 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.