Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CIA in fiction


 * 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. ✗ plicit  13:07, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

CIA in fiction

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This articles as the same problems as the recently deleted Articles for deletion/United States Navy SEALs in popular culture, Articles for deletion/Delta Force in popular culture Articles for deletion/Defense Intelligence Agency in popular culture and like. Mainly: "mostly unreferenced TVtropic listcruft." Like them, it fails numerous policies, guidelines and like: as an 'in popular culture' article, WP:IPC and MOS:POPCULT/TRIVIA, as a list, WP:NLIST and WP:SALAT, as a potential topic, WP:GNG and  WP:INDISCRIMINATE, due to lack of references, WP:OR and WP:V. This just more of the mostly unreferenced trivia ("In Ronin, Robert De Niro portrays a former CIA officer."). The tiny amount of prose content is either irrelevant or likewise, trivial descripions. This type of content is not encyclopedic - it's pure OR that belongs at https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/CIA. Note that like often, BEFORE and even the Furter reading section suggests this topic is notable (well, perhaps as CIA in culture>CIA in popular culture, see this discussion,but nothing here is redeemable, so WP:TNT is needed (although the further reading section does provide useful sources, so if anyone feels like rewriting this into even a stub, go for it). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  ✗  plicit  12:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Military, Popular culture,  and United States of America. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete yet another list of WP:NOTTVTROPES-violating trivia with minimal sourcing or verifiability. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 13:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep its written as an article, has several refs and many of the other entries are supported by links. - w o lf  14:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Leaning towards a Weak Keep - By doing something about TPH's concern about this falling into WP:NOTTVTROPES, I think it can be salvageable some information that is not as trivial cruft. Pahiy (talk) 01:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Pahiy Have you identified any salvageable information? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete missing significant coverage to meet the WP:GNG. I have seen other "in fiction" articles that have been written from adequate sources but this is a WP:TNT circumstance. Jontesta (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - The article as it stands is largely unsourced trivia, the references used in the article all seem to discuss specific entries on the list rather than the 'CIA in fiction' as a whole, agreed with nom in that the entries under further reading seem like excellent sources, but aren't used in the article at all. I think this could be shown to be a notable topic if more sources like those under 'further reading' were found and used to entirely rewrite the article to remove all the cruft. Waxworker (talk) 12:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I do wonder if User:TompaDompa or User:Uncle G would feel like stubbing this based on this further reading? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:27, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete per all. This isn't a notable topic because it doesn't include any reliable independent sources about the CIA in fiction, as per WP:GNG and WP:SALAT. There is a consensus about this. (It's possible that new sources could write a new article that meets our policies, but there would be nothing to WP:PRESERVE from the current article, and it would be a WP:TNT situation.) Shooterwalker (talk) 14:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete I agree with the nominator here, none of the sources seem to be about the topic. Fans of this article can easily make me reverse this decision by simply showing a book, a news article, an academic paper about CIA in fiction and I'll pivot in a second. Until then, I'm not convinced. CT55555 (talk) 15:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Largely consists of non-notable pop culture trivia, with no real sources that discuss the actual overall concept of the CIA's portrayals in fiction. There are some legitimate sources discussing some of the specific examples, but cobbling them together without any sources actually discussing the overall topic is WP:SYNTH.  For example, there are a couple of legit sources discussing the section on Charlie Wilson's War, but we already have an article on Charlie Wilson's War to include this information, and those sources do not discuss the portrayal of the CIA in fiction beyond that. Rorshacma (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2022 (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.