Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I'm too old for this shit

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 redirect to List of catchphrases. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:07, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm too old for this shit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 16:46, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A catchphrase from the movie Lethal Weapon. While the movie series itself is notable, there's nothing to indicate that this catchphrase has any sort of independant notability. At the very least, I'm not finding any sources that talk about the catchphrase in any sort of meaningful way, aside from just mentioning that it exists. There are plenty of hits in searches, but a lot of them are false leads (people using the phrase in general with no relation to the movie series), and even when they are talking about the movie, its generally just in lists of movie quotations with nothing to show notability. The PROD was contested by the page creator, so I brought it here for consensus. Rorshacma (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC) Rorshacma (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I find references in fiction going back to at least 1976, with no apparent relationship to the movie. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 17:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes the article reference states that the phrase wasn't even necessarily the first time used in the LW movies. But the series did definitely popularize the phrase. I think it is notable because the phrase has entered the English language as a common expression used by people. It's a part of the history of the development and growth of the English language. References need time to find because the phrase itself is not easy to search for meaningful references, as i explained here.Fotoriety (talk) 02:24, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Personally, I've always been of the opinion that sources should be found before actually creating an article rather than posting an unsourced article and hoping some show up later. Then we can avoid having to go through this process to begin with. But that's just me. Rorshacma (talk) 16:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No evidence that this is so notable that it requires an encyclopedic entry. And if references can't be found because it's so new (an unlikely proposition), then it shouldn't be in an encyclopedia. Drmies (talk) 02:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Would there be potential in making a mention of this catch phrase on the Lethal Weapon (film series) article and just redirecting to that page? I'm thinking that we could probably get away with a section on the LW film series article about the series in pop culture, with this being mentioned under that category. I'll try to see what I can find to get started on such a section, but it'd probably be a while before I can do it.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I wouldn't be opposed to mentioning the catchphrase in the Lethal Weapon article itself, but I would be against making this a redirect to that page. As already mentioned, this is a fairly common phrase that has been used by plenty of people well before and well after the movies with no connection to Lethal Weapon. There's no real evidence that the series "popularized" the phrase to the extent that this should be left as a redirect to the franchise. Rorshacma (talk) 16:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Normally, I would suggest a redirect to Lethal Weapon, but since there doesn't seem to be reliable coverage about the actual phrase, and also because the phrase had been in use even before the film, I don't think that a redirect is worthwhile. This phrase doesn't seem to be like "This is Sparta", does it? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ the article's lede is inaccurate as the term was not "first coined" by Murtaugh in Lethal Weapon. The article's sole source states "The catchphrase, said numerous times throughout the "Lethal Weapon" series by Roger Murtaugh (Danny Glover), has appeared in many movies over the last 25 years" and "Lethal Weapon" wasn't the first film to utilize some form of the defeated turn-of-phrase. From 'North by Northwest' and 'The Sting' to Murtaugh himself, enjoy a mash-up of movie characters getting too old for this."[1] Okay with a redirect to List of catchphrases. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 16:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per above. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) [2]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) [3]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) [4]

Delete and Redirect This brand new one-sentence stub article could have been BOLDly redirected in the first place and never brought to AFD unless the redirect were challenged. But as we DO know this catchphrase (or versions) has been used in mutiple films other than Leathal Weapon,[5] let's simply redirect this to List of catchphrases. I would encourage its author User:Fotoriety to perhaps use the above search results to create a new article Too old for this to share and explain the use of the term in numerous cases when actors and their characters expound on how their growning age affects their perfomances in real life and in their characters. THAT actually seems do-able... but as a sandbox work-in-progress at User:Fotoriety/draft/Too old for this and not be brought to article space until well built and well sourced. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The notability of the movie does not mean a catch-phrase associated with that movie is automatically notable too. The article does not demonstrate notability of this catch-phrase. Fails WP:GNG. Dolphin (t) 08:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Delete - Etymology of a popular culture catchphrase = unencyclopedic. Carrite (talk) 17:49, 25 July 2012 (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.