Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cockadoodi Car

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. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 23:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cockadoodi Car

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Cockadoodi Car (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non notable "catchphrase" (title of article), rest is original research and/or not directly related to the catchphrase, but to the movie. COntested prod, some elements improved, but main problem stays. WP:OR, non notable, the phrase seems not to be discussed (annalyzed, remarked, ...) anywhere. Fram 15:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Cockadoodi Car" was a phrase frequently used by the psychotic protagonist of the Stephen King novel, Misery. No it wasn't. Per the article it was used once; Annie Wilkes frequently used "cockadoodie" (thus spelt) as a general term of abuse, as I recall. Delete as OR and flawed at that. Tonywalton  | Talk 15:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and Redirect to Misery. Having the re-direct to the article on the book may disuade people from re-creating it. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 15:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment I disagree that there should be a redir. "Cockadoodie car" is used approximately once in the whole book/film and has no defining effect on either plot or characterisation (pace an analysis of Wilkes' repressed vocabulary and any connection between her general repression and her psychosis). As such a redirect would be akin to redirecting the phrase "Good-bye, my dear fellow" to War and Peace because Tolstoy has one of his characters say it on page 445. Tonywalton  | Talk 15:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect, mabye merge a short summery. This is a once used term in a notable book, unless any demonstration that the phrase has entered popular culture I don't see the notability of it. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nomination. I agree with the views of User:Tonywalton regarding a redirect. Xdenizen 20:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• I think Annie Wilkes' imperious attitude towards literature has had an effect on all of you. She insisted Sheldon burn the manuscript she detested, and now you are all crying to "burn" this article. There is also a parallel with Mrs White in Stephen King's Carrie insisting that her daughter "burn the dress" lol. 80.43.24.255 21:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC) — 80.43.24.255 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Hehe, good one. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Everything worth saying about this already exists in the Annie Wilkes article. Shimeru 22:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE What is the matter with you people? Have you had too much 'bitchly cow corn'? Never have I experienced so much outrage on such a simple article. Merely published to highlight some of the better scenes, as a fan of the movie, I would have thought there would be some degree of appreciation for my efforts. Whereas many internet users have complimented me on such a moving and interesting article, it was inevitable a minority of miserable readers would complain. Frankly, what would Annie Wilkes say? something along the lines of "What is the matter with you people?"...I suspect. For clearly making an 'oogie mess' of her legacy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samuraiman89 (talk • contribs) November 8, 2006 (UTC)

You are mistaken in thinking this is personal in any way. Your contributions are appreciated. However wikipedia has standards that are determined by consensus. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE It's is not I who have taken this issue to personally. In constructing this article, I took great care in to adhering to any regulations that govern the quality of articles submitted in to Wikipedia. The points I have chosen to highlight in my article are fact based, so it utterly baffles me as to how 'some' people still choose to dispute the truth. Everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but certainly FACTS are undisputable, and it was my assumption that Wikipedia is suppose to be FACT BASED. So perhaps those who moan about their own interpretations of the movie, can post their offensive comments on a chatroom ELSEWHERE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.74.11.24 (talk • contribs) 10:32, November 8, 2006 (UTC)

It is not verifiability that is the issue, it is notability. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Not quite sure if there are any merits to contributing articles on Wikipedia. Having done some research, it appears that some of those who have left comments on this page are regular pariticpants in so called controversial Deletion Drives. I am very disappointed that these narrowminded 'bullies' are permitted to continue their witch hunts and try to kill off articles prematurely. I am truly disgusted...though I refuse to be disparaged. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.74.11.24 (talk • contribs).

Notability is subjective, obviously those who found my article must have 'noticed' it. As a matter of fact, with no links or redirections in any article on Wikipedia to my page, it has done a damn fine job substantiating itself as worthwhile and therefore NOTABLE addition. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.74.11.24 (talk • contribs).

I have found the page by scanning the new pages[1], not by looking for this particular page. The majority of the page has noting to do with Cockadoodi Car, but only with the movie and the protagonists in general. The subject of the article, the particular quote Cockadoodi Car (which should be Cockadoodie Car), is utterly non notable and is not discussed in any WP:V sources, so WP:V is the issue here beyond the bare existance (but we are not here to have an article about everything that exists, no matter how minor it is). I'll ignore the rest of your post, as it goes against WP:NPA. Fram 20:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Credit, where it's deserved And I quote "Not here to have an article about everything that exist, no matter how minor",...well for a 'minor' article, there certainly has been alot of controversy. I suppose it is beyond some people to not have an orgasmic chill over everything. I feel defending this article is almost a lost cause. I suppost a perfect comment to describe the animosity against this article would be Clark Gable's famous phrase from 'Gone With The Wind'..but oh wait, maybe that phrase isn't notable enough. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.74.11.24 (talk • contribs).

Two people (one anonymous) pushing to keep this article doesn't qualify as "controversy". IrishGuy ^talk 21:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The Author The anonymous person (with IP Add 161.74.11.24) is me, the author...I had no intention of masking my identity, merely as I do not sign in everytime, I leave a comment. But if you were to have read the comments by Samuraiman89 (Author) and Anonymous, you should realise the conistency and continuations of the same points made. Such immature behaviour as 'Socking' is very unlikely to be adopted by myself over such a trivial issue as this article.....after all, we're not exactly arguing about the merits of world peace, or some deeply important goverment inituative. Cockadoodi Car indeed.

What is the matter with you people

I am an avid reader of Stephen King Novels, and with Misery being my favourite of them all, I was utterly disappointed to find out that people were petitioning for this fantastic and humorous article to be deleted.

As a journalist for an independent magazine, in which the fantastic phrase 'Cockadoodie Car' was voted the No.1 most memorable phrase in a Stephen King novel (with It’s ‘can you float?' coming in a close second), I believe that all fans of the novel and movie should be able to express their own personal views and interpretations of the depiction of the Annie Wilkes character in any way, shape or form, and wherever they wish, and that is exactly what the author of this article has done. I personally think that it is utterly repugnant, revolting, vile, nauseating and absolutely appalling that some people would rally together and demand that this article be deleted. Once again I must state 'repugnant'!!! Wikipedia is a place for people all over the world to share knowledge defined as ‘the fact of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association’. With this definition in mind I believe that the author has done nothing wrong as everything that is stated in the article was something gained through the experience of reading the book or watching the movie. Nothing mentioned in the article has been falsified they are all of fact, and I am sure they were not intended to disparage the character in question. This article is merely a description of certain scenes depicted in the movie, and I think it goes without saying that Kathy Bates did not receive an academy award for her performance in this film for nothing.

What era are you people living in, the Puritan era? Is this a remake of the classic Salem witch hunts? I’m half expecting for you all to demand that the author be burned at the stake (along with the article)? Once again I must state ‘repugnant’. This kind of bullying will not and shall not be tolerated. If the author of the ‘Cockadoodie Car’ article had made false statements leading to a false representation about the book or film then I would see the need for this cause of action. But I have read the book and watched the film a countless number of times and the phrase is fundamental in describing the mental state and actions of Annie Wilkes.Oh the misery 22:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)M. Patterson

Please stop creating new identities just so add more to this AfD under new names. That is sockpuppetry. IrishGuy ^talk 22:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I think it goes without saying that Kathy Bates did not receive an academy award for her performance in this film for nothing. Agreed, and I think it also goes without saying that she didn't receive it just for saying "Cockadoodi(e) car" either. Tonywalton  | Talk 11:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Irishguy I suppose everyone who supports my article is suppose to be an alternate version of me? Please do get life! I have better things to do, then to assume mutliple personalities to support a trivial article, such as that of a goddamn Cockadoodi Car. Nerd! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samuraiman89 (talk • contribs).

please refrain from personal attacks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

More than happy to obilge, but I do not appreciate meritless accusations.

I wish Annie Wilkes was here now to give you all a good dose of medicine and send you straight to bed! I also hear she has superb expertise in chiropody. I'm sure she would object to all this bickering, as "It has no nobility!" lol! 80.47.141.248 15:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

If she were here, she would be expected to object based on Wikipedia criteria. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No actually, if she were here, should would probably clonk everyone over the head with a typewriter, for trying to sabotage an article about her". As Ling Woo would say "I'm getting bored".

As Ling Woo also said, "I'm deaf to condescension. Right now I could hear a pin drop!" Hold on, I'm not sure I'm "comfortable" with what I just said. I think it has just set off the nervous twitch in my moustache. 80.47.162.46 23:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

A bit off topic, sorry, but I must say that the AfD is one of the more entertaining parts of WP. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Is that a positive response for my article? "Sniff, Sniff"

He's not complimenting you, he's complimenting me and my razor sharp wit and use of Ally Macbeal catchphrases in a time of crisis. I'm not sure what I think of this article, as reading it caused a severe case of acid reflux in which I began to choke like Claire Ottoms. Bile. 80.47.148.228 16:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

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.