Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who: A Celebration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 There is really no consensus to do anything here. The Delete arguements are just as convincing as the Keep arguements. Additionally, I find the Merge suggestion convincing. A suggested route would be to merge the article, then CSD for houskeeping once merged. But the end result of this discussion is No consensus.. Mercury 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doctor Who: A Celebration

Doctor Who: A Celebration (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Much as it pains me to nominate any Doctor Who-related article for deletion, I just feel that this has to go. While it is vaguely notable (though it currently lists no independent sources, since the one listed was produced by the BBC who also produced the event, a one-time concert which was, basically, for nerds! can't ever grow as an article. It's currently just a list, and a fairly uninteresting one at that. The article would never really help anybody, and contains no info that can't be found easily, all in the same place, online already. Since the "concert guide" section is totally unsourced, it constitutes NOR, as far as I can tell. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 17:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Tiny little keep I just stumbled across this artical and I have to admit 'it isn't great' and holds minimal, however I think the the actual subject is notable and this artical could be made into somthing brilliant, although I don't really have the time to do it.--Wiggs 21:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete just another Children in Need segment, one of many one off sketches, numbers and performances put on to get people watching the annual British charity telethon. Totnesmartin (talk) 00:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - not notable, not relevant, not worthy of a separate page. StuartDD contributions 08:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep it is partially sourced and there are a large number of Google hits for it (though yes, I know that doesn't establish notability). I have cleaned up and added some stubs, though more probably needs to be done. It's a shame that editors these days go for deletion rather than encouraging articles to be improved first. Stephenb (Talk) 13:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - As I said above, I don't believe that it has any possibility for improvement. Neither do these people.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Reply I know that's what you said, that's why I said it was a shame! These other people weren't listed (obviously) when you made the nomination. I'm not having a go at you, just expressing a personal opinion on the process of deletion of articles. Stephenb (Talk) 16:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment you can source and expand it as much as you like, but it's still not notable in itself. Put it on the tardiswiki if you really want to keep it. Totnesmartin (talk) 15:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Reply I said "weak keep"! You may think it isn't notable, but there's been very little to encourage people to add to it before it gets deleted, and someone may add something that makes it notable (to you or others). In my opinion, articles such as these deserve a chance as stubs and with tags before they get nominated for deletion. In addition, the nomination was partly because it was (unnecessarily) "just a list", which is why I cleaned it up, which seems a simple job to do before an admin looks at this AfD. Stephenb (Talk) 16:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge There have been at least four Children in need specials related to Doctor Who, we should be able to create one article that covers all of them. This would eliminate stubs and give us a more notable article. futurehawk|talk 22:36, 07 December 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.