Talk:Girls Just Wanna Have Fun (Xena episode)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 March 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Cites

I have added three cites to the article but there's lots more fun material out there. Editors just want to have fun ... :) Colonel Warden (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect and Tags

Having failed to delete the article at AFD, Collectonian now tries to remove by turning it into a redirect. This won't do. And the tags placed on the article do not seem appropriate and so I have removed them. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The tags are more than appropriate, and removing them just because you don't like them is not appropriate. You want to argue the merge, fine, though the AfD closing specifically notes that merging it to a list is fine. It has been tagged for merge for a month with not a single opposing remark made so I redirected to the list. Surviving the AfD does not mean it has forever to fix the issues or that it is somehow immune from a merge. None of the issues from the AfD have been addressed at all since it has been tagged. Absolutely NOTHING in the article supports the claims made in the AfD that it was notable. It is still all plot, with a few minor real world tidbits. It still completely fails WP:FICT and WP:EPISODE. You disagree, then you had a month to say something. You still disagree, bring it up at the fiction noticeboard. Collectonian (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Winning an award is evidence of more than notability - the episode is outstanding in this and other ways. Your assertions therefore seem wide of the mark. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Winning one minor award is not evidence of notability. That has already been hashed out in WP:FICT and WP:EPISODE and both agree. Just because you obviously think the episode is outstanding, doesn't make it so. In the AfD multiple claims were made that RELIABLE SOURCES existed to really show tons of notability, yet the article is the same plot filled mess it was then. Your claim that it has somehow improved is what is wide off the mark. Collectonian (talk) 22:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you completely. This should either be substantially rewritten to focus on the award-winning aspect, or - more reasonably - be redirected. The plot section is WAY too long & crufty, given the consensus at WP:FICT. Wikipedia is not a fansite! Eusebeus (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] refs

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC) [7] [8] [9] [10] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC) [11] [12] - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Refs have to actually be about this specific episode and give it significant coverage, not be a reference for the series as a whole, the season as a whole, or the series various themes of lesbianism et al. Those are all season and series references. Collectonian (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Continuing the AfD I see. ;-) - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 21:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

No, continuing to show the need for merging since the merges keep getting reverted with no article improvements being made to support them. Collectonian (talk) 22:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking any better to you (besides the synopsis)? - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 05:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Its better "looking" that most episode articles, but it still asserts no real notability. The minor bit in theme is better served in the whole Xena section the lesbian subtext and doesn't really speak to the episode being notable, but to the series as a whole with this episode as one example. I'd much rather see this information being used to fill out the season pages. Ditto the production section. And yeah, the plot is still way too long. Needs to be 300 words or less. Currently 526. Collectonian (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) OK, just checking. Agree to disagree and all that. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 05:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Good job, PF. Trim the plot section by a 100-150 words, flesh-out the production section with a few more facts, copyedit for prose issues, and you got yourself a nice GAN. – sgeureka ^t•c 08:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I watched it last night so I'll be rewriting the plot section soon. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)