Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nine Inch Nails in popular culture

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. - Daniel.Bryant 06:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nine Inch Nails in popular culture

Nine Inch Nails in popular culture (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete - this is another indiscriminate list and directory filled with largely unsourced and trivial items seeking to gather together every appearance of the band, every use of one of its songs and every time something that resembles the band or its name appears in any medium. No context provided to indicate the importance of the listed items either within the fictional item from which they are drawn or in the real world. See for precedent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rush in popular culture 2. Otto4711 03:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 03:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. per above. It is a page much better suited for the new "ninwiki.com", not Wikipedia. –King Bee ^{(T • C)} 06:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I bet I can find more references than this to Domino's Pizza in popular culture; should I start a page on that? This set of pages could be endless. --Brianyoumans 06:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete except that while 90% of these are just drive-by name-checks (or a listing of minor bits of music heard somewhere else) a few, such as the whole Tori Amos entry, have some relevance to the history of the "band" (Reznor). Items like that should be included somewhere else (and properly sourced; there are a couple of books that have brought up that one) if they are not already. --Dhartung | Talk 07:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - yet again, just a random collection of unencyclopedic facts: and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 12:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - it looks like this, along with most articles in Category:Musicians in popular culture are being AfD'd. If that's the case, what about most of the articles in Category:Representations of people in popular culture and each category up the tree from there? This article was spun off of the original Nine Inch Nails article because it, like many other articles, had a large "In Popular Culture" section. Would it be allowed if referenced like AC/DC in popular culture or should that also be considered a useless list and get AfD'd? And since this is an internet discussion, I will bring up Hitler (and why not Stephen Hawking too). Does something make AC/DC more "worthy" than Aerosmith? — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 13:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

These articles appear to be in part "all the references to the band that were too trivial to put in the main article, but we wanted to put them somewhere so that people wouldn't keep adding them." I suspect some of these subjects could have a useful article on "the image of x in popular culture", expanding upon their branding, use in subcultures, differing perceptions worldwide perhaps, etc. On the whole, though, I would agree that most of these ...in popular culture articles could go. --Brianyoumans 17:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Ckessler 16:43, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete subtrivial fancruft in popular culture. Wile E. Heresiarch 18:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete To quote from my arguments given in the number of other 'in popular culture articles: I would make the argument that any article with "in Popular Culture" in the title should be deleted. Such articles are going to necessarily be original research and you have the added (and significant) problem of defining what, precisely, constitutes 'popular culture.' Essentially, "NIN in Popular Culture" equals "NIN in American Culture." This is unencyclopedic and US-centric (or at least Western-centric). --The Way 08:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete trivia section. Gazpacho 11:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Trivial, unencylopaedic, all the stuff the nom said, precedent... GassyGuy 05:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Trivial. MichaelGriffin 00:09, 21 February 2007 (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.