Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power Play

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Power Play[edit]

Power Play was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep.

Please read this.

This page has no potential to become encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a general knowledge base. Wikipedia articles are neither encomia/fan pages, nor critical pans.

The page in question is about the two-hundred fifteenth episode of the television show Star Trek, The Next Generation. It is not a biography about an art work, but a mere synopsis of a Star Trek episode, and it has little potential to become encyclopedic because it was not a notable work on its own, and did not affect society in any observable way.

There is a Star Trek Wiki at http://www.memory-alpha.org, where articles like this would be appropriate. --NoPetrol 06:40, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Keep. Complete and well-written; not a stub. Gamaliel 06:46, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Did you even read the reasons why I am listing these on VfD? It has nothing to do with them being poorly written or stubs. --NoPetrol 07:29, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
      • Did you even read Wikipedia:Deletion policy? You know, the policy referred to in LARGE PRINT up the top of the VFD page? - David Gerard 22:55, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
      • Yes, I did read it, but I disagree. Gamaliel 20:17, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, because this article would fit in Sci-Fi encyclopedia and there's no reason why Wikipedia can't be all sorts of different types of encyclopedias instead of just a general reference. Listing all these pages at once for the same reason wastes our time, you should have listed only one and then listed others if people agreed with you. DreamGuy 08:33, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Xezbeth 09:49, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. See other episodes' votes for my reasons. P Ingerson 12:48, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, this is well written and we have many similar articles. I don't think this even qualifies as non-notable fancruft, as it is an actual episode. Rje 14:45, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Twelve, and finally, these votes coming cheaper by the dozen: m:Wiki is not paper, m:Wiki is not paper, m:Wiki is not paper, and Jimbo agrees. So there. :-) JRM 17:34, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)
  • Hmm, tricky one. I'm going to have to vote Merge and Redirect into Star Trek The Next Generation Episodes. --fvw* 19:51, 2004 Dec 27 (UTC)
  • Delete but not to worry, my vote won't count for much here. nn. Wyss 22:12, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    So, you consider Power Play to be a particularly bad article, then? It looks like you're short 11 delete votes, otherwise. :-) JRM 00:27, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)
'Tis a futile gesture, but comforting to me ;) Wyss 03:36, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - this nomination shows utter disregard for Wikipedia:Deletion policy. You know, the one linked in LARGE PRINT at the top of VFD. - David Gerard 22:55, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Megan1967 23:16, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Even if you think it's perfectly clear that a whole class of article should be deleted from Wikipedia, post a test case first for crying out loud. Bryan 01:09, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: Specialist encyclopedias take content known only to specialists. In a general encyclopedia, this is fancruft. Merge to the series article, at best. Otherwise, a summary and evaluation of a single episode, and not a groundbreaking one, of a show is not encyclopedic. Geogre 00:43, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    You know, Geogre, I can see the case you're proposing. And I might agree with it, if this were a different encyclopedia — and with that, I mean an encyclopedia with a different user base. You're basically asking for people without a primary interest in meeting these encyclopedic standards to weed out their fancruft, which seems hopeless, or you're asking people without a primary interest in the topic to weed out other people's fancruft, which, given the first group, seems equally hopeless. The Wikipedia ship may never sail between Scylla and Charybdis, I'm afraid. Not without being rebuilt from scratch, and then it won't be called Wikipedia anymore. JRM 01:13, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)
Well, the purpose of the back end of Wikipedia is to clean up, somewhat, the messes created by eager authors. The question is whether we exist to serve any author, no matter what, or to serve readers. For example, why no exquisitely detailed per episode article on "Diff'rent Strokes" or "Eight Is Enough" or "Lassie?" The answer seems to be, "Because our authors think Star Trek is kewel, and not those other shows." That, to me, makes us Everything2. This is not, so far as I see it, the Internet palimpsest. It's still an attempt at an encyclopedia, and what I consistently argue is for the logical organization of this information. In some cases, I think the information is utterly worthless, but most of the time I'm thinking of how and where the information can be retrieved and do some good. We do need to do the work that authors aren't doing, I'm afraid, and that's why I vote "merge and redirect" only if I think the information is vital and/or not written elsewhere. Geogre 14:07, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, personal POV over whether one would like this information to be in a small encyclopædia is irrelevant; this listing does not seem to have been made on grounds in line with policy. James F. (talk) 02:24, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. The web is not lacking in Star Trek episode guides. -- Walt Pohl 06:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Decent quality articles. Trash the trash, keep the goods. Leave those episode articles alone. --Phils 19:27, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge this and all other TNG episodes in its season into a single season guide. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:40, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep unless there is a specific Wikipedia policy against doing so. There are other articles devoted to individual episodes of other Trek series such as Enterprise, as well as individual books in a series (see James Bond). If Wikipedia's admin wants to cast a blanket rule, that's their perogative. (Cutting and pasting for all TNG episode-related VfD, apologies for duplication) 23skidoo 04:11, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • "Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing." All. Keep.Dr Zen 04:16, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep Dbenbenn 17:27, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep Michael L. Kaufman 04:47, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. For any admins reading this, count this as a vote to keep any ST episode page. I can't be bothered to vote on all of them. Dan100 10:56, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Holodoctor1 11:38, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.