Talk:PIs in non-fiction

Requested move
Tricky to suggest an encyclopedic title that conveys the author's original intention, but "Factual Private Investigators in popular culture" is the best I've got! Paulbrock (talk) 02:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * By default, things that go into an encyclopedia are non-fictional so this is a bit of an accessory to the title. Given that there isn't much prose in the article, I would suggest moving this to List of private investigators and converting the content to list format. I don't see that the distinction of pop culture is necessary either. If the PI is notable, then that is probably popular enough. Redlinks (non-notables) should be pruned, per WP:SAL. Ham Pastrami (talk) 02:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Upon closer inspection, it seems that this article is a dupe of Bobbi Bacha and doesn't even need to exist on its own. This article should probably be deleted, and the Bacha article needs to be completely reworked if not deleted as well. Ham Pastrami (talk) 03:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, a messy article which will require urgent treatment to resucitate it. Nitpicks - on your non-fictional point - Wikipedia is full of articles on "Fictional x....", there's even WP:FICTION, so it is relevant to distinguish this. Also a redlink doesn't *necessarily* mean that the subject is non-notable, only that they don't (yet) have an article.Paulbrock (talk) 03:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)