Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seppuku 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.--Fuhghettaboutit 14:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seppuku in popular culture

Seppuku in popular culture (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Trivia collection , consisting only of bare-mention references and leading original research. Contains none of the sourced analysis of clearly confused western notions about an eastern practice that such an article needs. Eyrian 17:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom Harlowraman 18:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - yet another in the seemingly unending cavalcade of worthless lists masquerading as articles. Wikipedia articles are not for listing every single time ever you see something. Otto4711 18:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - as per nom. Onnaghar(_T/^C) 18:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. I tried to save the thing by giving it its own article, so avoiding the pollution to the main Seppuku page. Now, since I've not found an angle to make it into a proper encyclopedic article, and nobody else has, I guess it is time to let it die gracefully. I still believe the material ought to be available somewhere, but standards are standards, and it indeed does not satisfy them.--Svartalf 21:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I'm trying to see how this is notable. CaveatLector^Talk 21:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, the article needs structure to it. Introduction, sections, tidy-up, etc... but none of that is a reason for deletion however. Mathmo ^Talk 00:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, the standard laundry list of loosely related trivia we're used to seeing in these types of article. Crazysuit 00:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per another trivia-filled content.--JForget 02:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Keb25 06:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete all %SUBJECT% in popular culture lists, they are nothing but trivia and violate the five pillars of Wikipedia as well. Burntsauce 17:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

the last time I asked you just which one, and what the specific language was that covered this, you replied only that it was anyway deletable by IAR. I suspect you mean V, but V as a pillar does not specify what counts as V, or says that articles where some content isnt V should be deleted rather than fixed.

Keep delete is for articles that cannot be fixed. Deleting articles that could be improved is really IAR-- All rules, even that of building an encyclopedia. 23:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I think if you saved this to your userspace and tried fixing it, you would find that it's difficult to see what's worth keeping. When one tries try to include everything, it links Madame Butterfly with an episode of South Park, and it's a mess. Seppuku-- honorable? Hilarious? Part of the sterotype of a samurai? I remember Buck Henry talking John Belushi out of this. Mandsford 00:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no sources that Seppuku is a notable phenomenon in popular culture. Carlossuarez46 20:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom et al. I know Listcruft when I see it. No reliable sources. Bearian 20:35, 2 August 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.