Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snape's Worst Memory

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 delete. Sango123 19:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Snape's Worst Memory

While I'm a fan of the series and edit some of the Harry Potter pages, this particular article is beyond fancruft. It's non-encyclopaedic, unless the encyclopaedia was the Encyclopaedia Potteriana, which it isn't. We don't need an entire article dedicated to one chapter of one Harry Potter book. There are plenty of online resources where this type of thing would be great; this isn't one of them. Exploding Boy 03:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

  • I too am a fan of the series, frequent contributor and member of the HP Project, I have to agree that this article should be nuked. If this article resulted in keep it would only open the flood gates for countless articles dedicated to individual HP chapters, which would piss the community off and only hinder the HP Project. Therefore Delete and if necessary merge any reusable bits into the main articles i.e. Severus Snape or Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix. Death Eater Dan (Muahaha) 03:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Remember that merging requires us to keep the edit history of the article by either a history merge or redirecting. If we merge, deleting the history is against the GFDL requirements. - Mgm|(talk) 11:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Transwiki to b:Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Books/Order of the Phoenix/Chapter 28 if the Wikibooks "Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter" want it. --Deathphoenix ʕ 04:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Just to expand upon this, the article title is the same as Chapter 28 of "Order of the Phoenix", and the contents describe this chapter in detail. Hence, my proposed Transwiki target. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Death Eater Dan. --Coredesat 05:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Avada Kedavra this one. It's not encyclopaedic in the slightest, as it does nothing but summarise a single chapter of a book, including lots of quotes that are probably significant copyvios. This page could only justifiably exist if a page for every other chapter of every other Potter book existed, as there's no reason for it to be singled out above the rest. And if a page for every chapter of any book existed, it would be a completely ludicrous state of affairs. Are people likely to search for this chapter title, though? Would a redirect to the main book article be at all worthwhile? Seb Patrick 10:01, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Transwiki per above if they want it. Merge if it's not in Snape's article yet. Otherwise delete. - Mgm|(talk) 11:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete ASAP. This is an article that no one would ever really look up. Adamc714 13:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect with Severus SnapeAc1983fan (talk • contribs) 15:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to snape --->|Newyorktimescrossword 21:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)|
  • Delete per nom and Death Eater Dan. No need to redirect, who would look that up in an encyclopedia? Inner Earth 11:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete per above. --Satori Son 16:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Seems like a bad idea to have encyclopedia articles about chapters of books. TomTheHand 20:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Avada Kedavra!! No individual book chapters in our encyclopedia, please. Quite possibly a copyvio as well, which makes any tranwikification seem inappropriate. Grandmasterka 22:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as much as I love the Harry Potter series, this is too much. Individual chapters do not deserve articles. --Musicpvm 05:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Avada Kedavra per above. Freddie Message? 23:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. The importance of the memory can be briefly explained in Snape's own article. And I do mean briefly, the "and then he said, and then she said, and then..." re-telling on the article being discussed is ridiculous.--RicardoC 00:09, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Avada Kedavra per nom. AgentPeppermint 17:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Avada Keddavra per nom. ForestH2 21:20, 26 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.