Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psychic paper

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 of the debate was Keep until it can be Merged with a relevant page. khaosworks 22:36, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Psychic paper

Delete. Very minor plot device in a few Doctor Who episodes, already explained where it appears in the episode synopses. Ultimately trivial and more a glossary entry than anything that deserves its own article. --khaosworks 13:26, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete. GraemeLeggett 13:43, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Hold. I rather torn on this one; it is a plot device in two episodes so far and moderately important. There may be more later in the series. As such I'd rather we wait for the rest of the series to be transmitted before making a final decision (especially as there isn't another article demanding the space so no real harm done if it remains). --Vamp:Willow 15:10, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Two episodes out of how many? (I found the comment on the talk page about it perhaps appearing again "in the 2nd season" quite amusing. How like Doctor Who to have a second "second season". ☺) In perspective, it would seem that psychic paper is on the same level as Bessie or a Janis thorn. Uncle G 00:13, 2005 May 30 (UTC)
      • No -- it was used (but not called by this name) on a number of occasions, most niotably by the Pertwee-incarnation (who was the one who had most need of false ID papers). It was just never explained so clearly. So vote:keep. --Simon Cursitor 07:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. I'm extremely suprised we don't have a "Items of Doctor Who" type page to hold all the obscure items and equipment that only pop up in a few episodes. -Robmods 18:44, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. Agree with Robmods, we should make an Items page for Doctor Who and put this on it.--GingerM 16:40, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. I agree with Robmods and GingerM. Psychic paper doesn't deserve its own article, but it should have an entry on a "Items of Doctor Who" page. --bjwebb 16:36, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
  • VampWillow is right to be torn. On the one hand, psychic paper, specifically, is on the level of Bessie. On the other hand, plot devices that allow writers to avoid having to deal with inconsequentialities or inconveniences are significant when in widespread use. A Universal Translator allows writers not to have to have the characters speaking in an alien language. A sonic screwdriver allows writers to get the characters into interesting locked buildings and so forth, and thus let their curiosity get them into trouble. A piece of psychic paper allows writers to get the characters past flunkies and security guards. And of course a Babel fish highlights the ludicrousness of such plot devices, by disproving the existence of God as a side-effect. Uncle G 00:13, 2005 May 30 (UTC)
  • Merge. On a completely unrelated note, is there an article on the frequent MacGuffin, newspaper from the future? -- BD2412 talk 01:06, 2005 May 30 (UTC)
    • It isn't a MacGuffin. A MacGuffin is something insufficiently explained, or whose details are never shown, or that can be replaced by some other similar item with no loss of sense. The newspaper from the future is often shown in detail. Indeed in Early Edition, for example, the exact text of the newspaper from the future, as the headlines change, is shown. Similarly, it cannot be replaced by something else (such as, for example, an issue of Playboy from the future) without loss of sense. The MacGuffin in Early Edition is not the newspaper. It is the cat. Uncle G 06:52, 2005 May 31 (UTC)
  • Merge Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. If it ever becomes as well known in popular culture as the Babel fish or sonic screwdriver then the article can always be recreated (when there's actually something to say about it). --G Rutter 08:22, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep whats wrong with it? article does no harm to remain. a page with Dr Who things wouldn't be a bad idea, though. UkPaolo 16:37, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and Merge An items of doctor who page is a good idea. But would that be a category that led to individual pages like sonic screwdriver, TARDIS key, Bessie, dimensional stabiliser, superphone, and k-9 (is K-9 an item?) - or would it just be a page with all of these kinds of things on them. Items like psychic paper, janis thorn, dalekanium, time ring, biodata, nitro-9, time ram, temporal orbit, the Worshipful and Ancient Law of Gallifrey, the Eye of Harmony, etc. Why not? It is a pretty big task to do all of this, but we're dedicated fans, right? --Travlr23 22:55, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
dedicated, but not necessarily daft. Qui bono? There's more inmportant work to be done like the stories without articles, rather than the side issues of the various items. GraemeLeggett 08:42, 31 May 2005 (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.