Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Jong-il 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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 18:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kim Jong-il in popular culture

Kim Jong-il in popular culture (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Original research, article has no sources or references. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 00:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom. Although I'm not disputing that it's an interesting subject, I don't really see how this article could be reasonably improved without turning it into a random collection of trivia and pop culture references. -- Seed 2.0 00:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletions. -- Kiersta 00:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
• Comment nearly all articles in the category Category:Representations of people in popular culture lack any sources, so rather than afd-ing them (which would seem to indicate that such sources do not exist) let's tag them and see what happens? Carlossuarez46 18:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • "Nearly all articles in the category lack any sources" - yes, and many of them have been deleted for that reason. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 21:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep but add sources. This is definately noteworthy, as Kim Jong-Il is a common theme.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 10:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, I don't see how this trivia list is encyclopedic or useful.--JyriL ^talk 12:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - anything that's not a blatant piss-take be merged into Kim Jong-il. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 13:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as unsourced OR, and potentially hugely damaging to Wikipedia's special relationship with North Korea. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 13:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete- A load of unsourced trashy trivia. Retiono Virginian 15:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Unsourced laundry list of trivial appearances that do nothing to illuminate the topic of Kim Jong-il's place in "pop culture". Very few "in pop culture" articles do it right, this isn't one. Arkyan • ^(talk) 15:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep or selectively merge. He is a public figure who's been the subject of some amount of satire or usually hostile commentary, so there is information here that should not be lost. Surely his appearance as a major character in the major motion picture Team America: World Police belongs in his article in chief; it belongs there whether he has a separate "in popular culture" article or not. As for referencing this article, for purposes of this information a link to the article about the movie is easily sufficient; any skeptic can verify the fact by watching the film. The same holds true for most of the other appearances.

  The offloading of valid material into "in popular culture" sections which then get deleted with arguments such as this is becoming a tool for censorship, when people imagine that satirical portrayals sully the dignity of admired figures. But how many fans does Kim Jong-il have here? - Smerdis of Tlön 15:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I for one have no reservations against a selective merge of pertinent information into the parent article, but I think that only goes back to the original problem. The source of most of these "pop culture" articles is usually an unresolved debate among editors of the article in question as to how much (if any) trivia appearences is warranted in an article. Instead of resolving the issue through the normal debate process, it generally involves an edit war of unilateral deletion of all the material in the article and the inclusion of any hint of an appearence, regardless of how important or notable it may be. Instead of reaching a compromise, someone invariably forks the information out into one of these articles, which invariably appear here on AfD. This would not be an issue if there were more editorial cooperation in these disputes and the application of normal dispute resolution rather than seeking unilateral solutions such as wholesale deletion of a section and forking it out. Arkyan • ^(talk) 16:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose the first thing we need to correct is the perception that the direct portrayals of public figures in motion pictures, TV shows, and other fictional works is "trivia". I frankly don't grasp why these things are thought to be somehow beneath notice. - Smerdis of Tlön 21:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a difference between an actual portrayal and simply an insulting verbal reference. That's the issue in this case. Actually portrayals i have no problem with, but tagging verbal insults is not noteworthy. Icactus 22:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Delete - There is a difference between this and portrayals or appearances or characterizations in popular culture (like the page "Fictionalized portrayals of George W. Bush"). This page simply lists occurences where Kim Jong-il has been insulted by figures in US pop-culture. The only listing of any value would be the "Team America" portrayal which is properly located on the page regarding the movie. Otherwise the page is just a check list of verbal insults which on their own have no encyclopedic or substantive value (as well as unprecidented on wikipedia). As for a merger of the "Team America" reference: Kim Jong-il's biography should stick to things he has done or has had influence over, and not things representing him (like the film depiction) that are outside the scope of his life. Icactus 20:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:OR. Sr13 (T|C) 23:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong delete Unencyclopedic. Apart from the "Team America" reference, this is a completely random list of references to an internationally important figure. The number of such references is surely too many to be organized in a finite list. As for the "Team America" reference, that is something that really belongs on the "Team America" page. Dr bab 01:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC).
• Delete - Unencyclopedic trivia that doesn't deserve its own article--$UIT 16:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. This article is pretty much like Fictionalized portrayals of George W. Bush which also provides only a couple of references, but everyone can watch the movies. The article should be improved rather than deleted.Biophys 07:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Thewinchester ^(talk) 05:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete or selectively merge - doesn't need its own article apart from the main Kim Jong-il one. --Mary quite contrary ^(hai?) 19:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• Mere trivia (even if it were verified); delete. -- Hoary 13:17, 11 April 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.