Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black and white (colours)

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. Coredesat 04:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Black and white (colours)

Black and white (colours) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article has no content, just a bunch of trivia lists of things that people see as related to black and white. There's no topic here, so no need for an article. There's already an article black-and-white, but we don't don't want all this junk merged there, as someone recently proposed, so let's just delete it, OK? Dicklyon (talk) 04:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep it amounts to a list of black-and-white objects that are notable for being so. That's not trivia, but a useful guide to content, organizational device, and guide to browsing. DGG (talk) 04:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Loosely associated list with no apparent notability, and the introduction is basically covered by black-and-white. Probably should be made a redirect to that article. 23skidoo (talk) 04:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Redirect to black-and-white. Mh29255 (talk) 04:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete if for no other reason than to keep from having articles like "red and gold", "blue and silver", "green and white", etc. This is more of a parlour game than an article, where someone has made a list of things that are black and white. I can't help but think of $20,000 Pyramid, with someone giving these as clues. "A penguin... a pirate flag... a nun..." "Things that move?" "No... a butler, an old movie, a skunk..." "Things that smell bad?" "Blackbeard's flag...(BUZZ).. oh dammit" Mandsford (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete loose/trivial association, and per Mandsford' logic. DGG's comment was considered, but things that are notable for being X color, things that are notable for being bigger than a breadbox, we could do nothing but make such lists. Perhaps a category would be a reasonable compromise? JERRY ^talk _contribs 05:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Few if any of the items listed are notable simply because they are black and white. Penguins and pandas would be just as notable if they were purple and green. And Charlie Chaplin wasn't black and white! His films were. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" pretty well covers it. Also, this is all in the category of original research. Beeblbrox (talk) 06:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete We cant have a page for every pair of colors. Also very loosely associated Corpx (talk) 07:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Strong Delete I agree a very trivial list. --Sin Harvest (talk) 08:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Very Weak Keep, page was vandalised here (and never really recovered), prior edit provided some context about natural occurence of this scheme. black-and-white has a somewhat different focus on a technique. Zedla (talk) 09:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete I suggested the merge, but deleting is just as good, if not better. Nothing notable here.Adoniscik (talk) 15:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

comment looked at prior edits pointed out by Zelda, even with an introduction, this article is still completely unsourced original research and trivial research at that. Beeblbrox (talk) 19:44, 28 January 2008 (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.