Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4-D (The X-Files)


 * 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   keep. The nom's deletion rationale no longer applies to the updated article. – sgeureka t•c 09:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

4-D (The X-Files)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Substub article with literally no content worth merging, not even a plot summary. Sceptre (talk) 11:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 
 * Delete. Does not contain enough material to be considered a stub. - Mgm|(talk) 12:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: non-notable episode. JamesBurns (talk) 07:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NOTPAPER and over seven years of precedent for episode articles. It's an episode of a notable TV show. That's why you could create all those Doctor Who episode articles, Sceptre. --Pixelface (talk) 08:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There's NOTPAPER, and then there's a waste of space. This is the latter. Sceptre (talk) 23:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of X-Files episodes as is recommended by the episode guideline. Why waste time at AfD for what should be an uncontroversial redirect? DHowell (talk) 03:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral :) Astadourian (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Work underway I have access to material on this show, and I will try to get the article up to the necessary standard to survive. I imagine the article may not be superbly written in the end, due to the fact that time is against me, but I can re-word if necessary if the article passes the AFD.  Allventon (talk) 22:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I feel I've made the best effort to develop the article under the time constraints (the article is very rough) that I can with the material I have.   If this article survives the AFD, I intend to spruce it up.  Allventon (talk) 01:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What kind of source is "The X-Files: The Collector's Edition"? Zagalejo^^^ 07:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  06:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   -- Cerejota (talk) 06:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Most X-Files episodes can be proven notable with a little work. There's a good amount of material out there, in the form of episode guides, magazine articles, etc. This article seems to be shaping up nicely, thanks to Allventon. Zagalejo^^^ 07:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, agree with, , and appreciative of ongoing work by . Cirt (talk) 07:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Being a small article isn't grounds for deletion.  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I haven't seen an episode of the X-Files that can't establish notability with (a ton of) work. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 08:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep due to continued improvements after it was brought to Afd. Nice work.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:55, 16 February 2009 (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.