Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost: The Journey (second nomination)

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 Speedy Close, at DRV already, pending DRV outcome. You can't have it both ways, if you want to relist now, withdraw the DRV and wait a decent time (a month is typical) before relisting at AfD. If you want a DRV with a result of delete, don't relist here. If you want a DRV with a result of relist at AfD, you have to let the DRV finish first. I'm surprised that User:WCityMike, who has been using process as a strong argument in the DRV to contest the outcome, would flub up this bit of process this way... --++Lar: t/c 05:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lost: The Journey (second nomination)

(Please see also the current Deletion Review discussion and the previous AFD)

• Strong delete. Fails to meet notability standards. — Mike • 03:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Clerical note. Please note that this article cannot be transwikied to Lostpedia. Also, please either vote firmly either delete or keep — votes for transwiki, merge, or merge or delete were all counted as keep votes in this article's prior nomination. — Mike • 04:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Even is individual episodes are generally notable, I can't imagine a clip show is. --djrobgordon 04:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy close. This just got closed today, and is currently listed at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Lost: The Journey. As far as I see, there has been no consensus to relist on AfD there, so this should be closed pending the outcome at DRV. BryanG^(talk) 04:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as should have been done after the previous AFD. I made the mistake of saying, "merge anything useful ... otherwise delete" in the first AFD. Unfortunately, this was misunderstood to be an impossible (because of the GDFL) "merge and delete". I had thought that "otherwise" would imply mutual exclusivity, but I guess not. At any rate, so that there is no misunderstanding as to my opinion on the matter, delete per the previous AFD. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This "article" is little more than a laundry list of topics covered in a clip show. I can't see how that is an encyclopedic topic. BigDT 04:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy close for procedural reasons per BryanG. Sandstein 05:21, 15 June 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.