Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monica's apartment

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 MERGE to somewhere. Clearly not a consensus to outright banish the content, as many deleters confess the possibility of a viable merge. However, the target of the merge is unclear, it's either the redlinked article or Friends itself. Making a new article out of a copypaste of two existing ones seems poor to me, and I don't feel duty bound to do such as the outcome of an AfD in any case. I'm therefore taking a slightly unusual route: I shall redirect both articles to Friends for now, and ask that someone extracts the contents from the respective histories and does as they editorially see best with it. Following that, they should change the target of the redirects as appropriate. -Splash - tk 22:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monica's apartment

Monica's apartment (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete - unencyclopedic minutae masquerading as an article. There appear to be no independent reliable sources of which Monica's apartment is the primary subject. Otto4711 00:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete for being a pointless regurgitation of minutae that, were it not so unutterably unencyclopaedic, belong in the main Friends article. Eddie.willers 01:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Unencyclopedic article--$UIT 01:03, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • deleteGman124 01:22, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as needless detail about a fictional location that lacks independent sourcing.-- danntm T C 02:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Joey's apartment to a new article on Locations in Friends or some such. The show is notable enough that some description of the various locations is encyclopedic, but I'm not sure the current style is the way to go. FrozenPurpleCube 02:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge It can be added to the Friends article. Should not stand alone. JBEvans 14:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge-No need for an article on a fictional characters house. Merge to the Friends article (probably with Joey's apartment also). --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 17:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge into Locations in Friends. --Fang Aili talk 18:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge into Monica Geller.--Paloma Walker 21:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete, or merge into Locations in Friends. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 22:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge in to Monica Geller or even delete. No sourcing, fictional location. —Anas talk? 23:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or Merge. (I've also commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joey's apartment.) It doesn't adequately cite its sources, but it's only been tagged as such since January, and could still improve. On the other hand, I'm not sure what kind of neutral, reliable sources are going to be available for Monica's apartment. If the article is not deleted however, I'd rather it be combined with Joey's apartment and Central Perk as Locations on Friends. WODUP 00:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge Either delete altogether or merge in with prior noted articles. JAMDAWG 14:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC) talk with me·changes
  • Strong Keep or Merge into Locations in Friends. As notable as Central Perk, this is a major setting for a tv program that is a cultural icon. The apartment, and its companion Joey's apartment and Central Perk were more than mere backdrops to the story, they were almost featured characters themselves, moving plots forward and figuring significantly as content, not setting, in many episodes. I could see merging the three articles into one "Locations in Friends" article, but have no problem at all and would prefer to keep them as separate pieces. It would be a real shame to lose the material that was assembled for these articles because of overzealous deletion. Tvoz |talk 03:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge or Delete - yes in that order! Has no references, no verification outside of wiki on the page and it is probably difficult if not impracticable to find any singular references encyclopedically supportive of this content.--VS talk 12:24, 14 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.