Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Da Vinci Code WebQuests

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
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 of the debate was Keep. There is some consensus to merge, but a merge vs. keep debate can be carried outside of AfD. Deathphoenix ʕ 16:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Da Vinci Code WebQuests

Violation of WP:SPAM and WP:NOT. User 67.100.48.189 (contributions) and his/her suspected sockpuppet 67.101.134.76 (contributions) repeatedly spammed numerous articles with the Webquest information, even though they fail WP:WEB. The current article contains far too many external links, in violation of WP:EL. Also note that a Google search for "The Da Vinci Code WebQuests" only yields 63 results, with the first 3 from Wikipedia and its Answers.com mirror. Madchester 20:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy Delete A1. Danny Lilithborne 21:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into The Da Vinci Code (film) —Mets501talk 22:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete already merged into film article; I also believe 67.101.128.103, 67.100.49.172, 67.101.128.6, and just about every IP in the 67.*.*.* range in the edit history of the Da Vinci Code is the same guy. But not in 66.*.*.* range, those are likely User:Rodgerbales, who I have talked to and has complied with my requests and DOES NOT start edit wars that violate the 20 reverts rule. M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • delete, per nom, no further action required.--cjllw | TALK 00:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Heavy Revision & Possibly Move - See also: Talk:The Da Vinci Code#Webquest_solution?. I had created this article originally in an attempt to diffuse arguments over placement of WebQuest content that had been on The Da Vinci Code and others (I simply moved a copy of content that had been on another article, but I don't remember which offhand currently). I feel that that in theory information recent promotional marketing strategies can be good information (espically to people with interests in those areas (marketing majors?)) IF and only if it can be written in NPOV. Furthermore I feel that while such information is interesting (and has been on The Da Vinci Code for years (per its talk page)), I feel that it's not quite directly related to the content of the Book or the movie (it's more related to the general public's interactions with the book/movie), and therefore deserving of a seperate page. Thirdly as the Da Vinci Code has the potential of being a large franchise (3 books, 1 movie already, several related books), and having seperate articles that are common/related to multiple articles can help keep the pages smaller and concise (note the too long tag on the book's page). All that said... In this case I'm also not opposed to Deletion, per nom. --Charlie(@CIRL | talk) 04:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge or Keep. The information is appropriate for Wikipedia, though the format isn't. To be honest, this info will probably need to be split out to its own page eventually anyway (the Da Vinci Code article is getting too large as it is), but as it stands, this info should be merged back into either The Da Vinci Code or The Da Vinci Code (film) until it can be split out in a more encyclopedic manner. I'm also open to someone heavily revising this article to bring it more into line with Wikipedia format, in which case it can be kept. --Elonka 16:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
(Update: Since the article has been extensively edited, I am switching my vote to Keep) --Elonka 22:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Smerge to The Da Vinci Code. Stifle (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Deserves to be mentioned in the The Da Vinci Code movie article, but by itself it is just a short marketing campaign. --SirNuke 03:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. (revised opinion) - yet another new webquest has just been released by Eurostar in the last day or so.. it's starting to make sense to have a separate article for Da Vinci Code webquests, and then the two other articles due to length issues (one for the Da Vinci Code book and one for the Da Vinci Code movie and future movie(s)). Some of the comments above like SirNuke's or M1ss1ontomars2k4's could have researched a little deeper first - I don't think some of the commenters are even aware there are separate webquests, some related to the movie, some to the book - two of the quests have been running since 2003 and are not short-term promos, they are quests in their own right and continue generate a lot of interest. I don't know if Google will keep thier webquests on line permanently, but judging by the interest, I'd imagine they will. Likewise with the even newer Eurostar quest - it seems like launching Da Vinci Code Quests is gaining momentum, so it would make sense to keep this info active and on its own page. As far as people deleting links, if it's possible to protect portions of an article, then do so. AFAIK, the legitimate links that have been there from the start are this one for the original two webquests since 2003, and these two for the Google webquests. NB: I've added links for the new Eurostar webquest to the article. 64.105.73.85 17:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge or Keep--Sina 13:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep for Now. The google contest doesn't end until the 21st, at this point here are the wisest things to do, since there are those individuals who are intent upon deleting the work of those who are trying to gather helpful information for all to use, I would 1. keep the page separate until sometime after May 21 2006, and 2. lock it from edits and deletes until that point. I'm sure what happened before will start to happen again. 65.182.71.146 14:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep — When looking for links to the webquests, I found this page and found it helpful. Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if more webquests are created, and as this happens, it would be helpful to collect all this information on one page. Trey56 16:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep? Rename?. I'm not really sure about this, to be honest! I think having the fine detail of the various WebQuests is maybe a bit too "crufty". But maybe they could go under a new article The Da Vinci Code spinoffs which could also include notes on the video game, The Da Vinci Code (film), and the many other things that are popping up everywhere. What do people think? --A bit iffy 21:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Even with the revisions, there are still far too many external links. Half the page length is devoted to external links, when the actual article itself is at most 500 words long. Remember, Wikipedia is not a repository of links. --Madchester 16:23, 17 May 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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_The_Da_Vinci_Code_WebQuests_986c.html"