Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bacon on The Simpsons


 * 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   delete. Per WP:SNOW. Mmm, snow.  Sandstein  22:17, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Bacon on The Simpsons

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Disputed prod, so it's got to come here. I prodded it, saying "I'm not sure if there's a speedy category for this - there is absolutely nothing here of encyclopedic value." It was contested because, to quote the deprodder, "I created this article as part of Bacon Challenge 2010." I am unable to see how that can justify this article's existence. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) | (talk to me) | (What I've done) 16:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep This article is not a prod. I created it as part of Bacon Challenge 2010. Grundle2600 (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - Completely random article, and I'm not even sure where to begin with the policies it breaks. What's next - Syrup in The Simpsons? Completely arbitrary in nature and doesn't deserve an article. Skinny87 (talk) 17:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This is really more like raw data than an article. So not notable. I could start an article on what birds I have seen in my backyard and it would be as encyclopedia worthy as this. Borock (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Possibly--but bacon tastes much better than those birds, I imagine. Isn't there a guideline that says that every bacon-related article is automatically notable? I mean, would you delete Francis Bacon as well?? :) I kindly ask that the following, objective admins keep an eye on this process, lest we throw the pork away with the belly: User:Pigman and User:Thedemonhog, admins in the Suidae category. Drmies (talk) 17:18, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Some of them probably taste better, and at least would be Kosher. Anyway the main point of the Simpsons is to make fun of American culture, so naturally bacon would come up now and then.Borock (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If that were the case, I would imagine that every time an article was deleted, the author would recreate it, but this time by adding in a section about their association with Bacon, thus deeming it un-deletable. Ultimate inclusion tactic FTW. ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 17:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. An artifact of a project likely to spawn dozens of articles of equal merit. PhGustaf (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Question: Has this topic itself received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject? Cirt (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, if there is reliable secondary source, I doubt the author is a piece of bacon, if that's what you're asking. :) - 204.117.76.249 (talk) 18:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Sorry Grundle2600, but this topic hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources.  The left orium  17:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless my above question can be answered in the affirmative (unfortunately :P) Cirt (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: As much as I like Bacon and the Simpsons, the topic just isn't covered enough, and even if it was, it still really wouldn't be notable enough for inclusion. ~Super Hamster  Talk Contribs 17:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Cirt, Hamster, if you have another look at the article, you'll see that the two references I added should make the topic as solid as, say, bacon and Jessica Simpson put together. Now there's a tasty thought, at least for some of you. Case closed, as far as I'm concerned! Drmies (talk) 17:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NOT - this is nothing more than Trivia. Blueboar (talk) 17:45, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - without any reliable sources diuscussing the link between Simpsons and bacon, this looks like original research or synthesis. Pit-yacker (talk) 18:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  —  Lady  of  Shalott  18:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm sorry, not all of us agree with a plan to have "as many bacon related articles as possible" on Wikipedia. Mandsford (talk) 18:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I love The Simpsons, but this is the definition of cruft. What next, "Eggs on The Simpsons" (remember when Homer got upset at the guy from the Egg Council?) or "Bowling on The Simpsos"?  TJ   Spyke   18:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Skinny87.  smithers  - talk  -  sign!  19:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - obviously. Not a great start to the Great Unblock Experiment. -- Scjessey (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not really called for.  Grsz 11  22:35, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per almost all the above comments. I'm not sure this isn't a parody. EALacey (talk) 20:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable subject per above. --John (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete unnotable fork on pork. Mathsci (talk) 23:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I think you win the instant rimshot on this AfD :).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Bacon  Sp in ni ng  Spark  00:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Bacon is delicious. But I think if I would start an article about Coffee on Gilmore Girls, Spaghetti on the Sopranos, Lasagna in Garfield, Cheese on Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers and Spinach in Popeye I would be rightfully slapped with a speedy tag. Pretty much an example of a good silly article that doesn't have encyclopedic value. Will not deny the amusement value, however.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Bacon on televison where we will record every instance of bacon depicted on television programming as well as actual bacon placed on television sets. Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is getting out of hand... and boardering on being disruptive. Humor can be taken too far. Although I do have to wonder why no one has suggested that this be speedy under , as it would fit with the joke. Blueboar (talk) 15:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Out of ham? Enjoy some bacon. Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 18:28, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Article should be deprecated as a content pork. Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I think it is sad that this is the most interesting article I have read today and yet I feel it should be deleted.  I suppose this should really be on a Simpsons fan site, but it is pretty interesting.  It is with great sadness I am voting delete.  I don't know if that says more about me or more about Wikipedia DRosin (talk) 21:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete There is nothing kosher about this article. Warrah (talk) 17:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Completely ridiculous. Not even worth a merge into Bacon on television. Steven Walling  06:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Too fat, fat, you must cut lean You gotta take the Bacon article to the AfD. Stub, change, take it off, super ban ban, super ban ban. Шизомби (talk) 16:45, 22 December 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.