Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brilliant Disguise (Law & Order)


 * 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   no consensus. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Brilliant Disguise (Law & Order)

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Delete per WP:NRVE, non-notable, no reliable sources--Rajah (talk) 21:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Please also see: Television episodes. --Rajah (talk) 12:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: Just because the episode itself isn't notable, the series as a whole is. It's part of an episode guide, so I see no harm in keeping it. -- Thebrickwithouse (User talk: Thebrickwithouse) 17:37, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree that the series as a whole is notable. I'm arguing that this episode is non-notable and should be deleted. --Rajah (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: Not notable? Well it just seems to be a episode in what the Guiness World Records 2011 counts as the worlds most successgul police procedural show/ franchise, so we can scratch the not notable part out...and finding more references to the 1 reliable ref. that's already there, can easily be fixed. I have seen many articles, like this one, in worser states. -- MelbourneStar☆ (talk to me) 02:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it's not notable. Law and Order itself is notable, but not every episode of Law and Order is notable. Please see WP:NRVE. It's not about the "state" of the article either, it's the notability which is the important factor here. --Rajah (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: Most show's with seperate episode articles on this webstie are in the same shape and worse. So yeah, if you delete this one, half of this show and every other show's seperate episode articles on Wikipedia would have to go as well. And what more sources does it need, it's an episode not a episode guide! I could see if it had other information like if the cast departed, or the episode was swapped with another or some other peice of information but I do not see that here and that is not the case. I think it should be kept. Saying this page is not notable is saying every episode of House is notable.--SVU4671 (talk) 04:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This one episode of Law and Order is non-notable. And yes, most episode articles on Wikipedia are non-notable. --Rajah (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * "This one episode of Law and Order is non-notable". Nice to hear your opinion. -- MelbourneStar☆ (talk to me) 12:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is non-notable because it's notability has not been demonstrated. Instead of pointing out "my opinions", wouldn't it be better to post some evidence of it's notability? I agree that opinions don't matter, evidence does.--Rajah (talk) 20:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment What's wrong with a redirect to the 'List of' article? Seems a reasonable search term to me. Edgepedia (talk) 19:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, as Wikipedia's rules now stand, a redirect to a 'List of' sounds like a reasonable idea. --Rajah (talk) 04:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of deleting these sort of articles, per WP:PRESERVE. I looked and I'm not seeing signficant coverage in independent media (e.g. reviews in newspapers), but this can change. Sometimes programmes only reach notability some time are they were orginally shown, and notability can be shown by number of books. However, currently there is no out-of-universe information apart from the viewing stats. Redirects are cheap, available using normal editoring tools and can be undone when an editor wishes to expand an article with such information. It also allows the episode titles to appear on disambiguation pages, guiding readers to the little information we do have on the episode.
 * Other editors have been saying "this episode is notable" but the article is in a poor state. Readers would be better served with a re-direct, and this can be easily undone if anyone finds a couple of sources and wants to work on the article. Edgepedia (talk) 05:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: Okay what, if this was any other show would this conversation even be taking place? I think it should stay because: most episode articles are non-notable and have source issues, plus it's an episode in the final aired season of Law & Order. I really don't see an issue here, I say this episode's article should stay. As MelbourneStar1 and SVU4671 have said, there are more articles like this one and in even worse conditions. I vote: keep it.--66.217.112.3 (talk) 20:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I intend to nominate other episodes from other shows as well, don't worry, I'm not just picking on Law & Order. As for their existence right now however though, WP:OTHERSTUFF holds that the "other stuff exists" argument doesn't hold water. The article is non-notable and there aren't verifiable reputable sources on it. That's it. By Wikipedia's notability guidelines, all television episodes that do not have verifiable sources should be deleted or at best, redirected. If people disagree with that, then the television episode (and many other subjects) notability guidelines should be rewritten or clarified. As it stands now, the rule is very clear and I haven't seen any evidence of the verifiable notability. --Rajah (talk) 04:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of Law & Order episodes (season 20). There is nothing in the article to suggest notability of the actual episode (the notability of the show is not in dispute here) and no real-world information is included (such as behind-the-scenes production info, critical reception or academic analysis). Searching google books, news and scholar, I couldn't find anything that could be added. This episode could quite easily be considered notable in the future, if it receives more attention from scholarly sources. There could also be more information out there, such as newspaper reviews, that are not yet available online. As it stands though, it appears to be impossible to prove any notability. The standard for non-notable tv episodes is, I believe, to redirect to an episode list and to preserve it as a valid search term.-- Beloved  Freak  11:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTINHERITED. I agree that the TV show is notable. That obviously doesn't mean that every single episode of it is notable. If anyone can bring up some reliable, third-party sources discussing this episode directly, that would be different, of course. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  District Collector  ─╢ 21:35, 24 June 2011 (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.