Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dingoes Ate My Baby (1st nomination)


 * 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 of the debate was keep. -- King of Hearts talk 03:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Dingoes Ate My Baby
weak Delete, fancruft, even for Buffy fans this is fancruft. At best this should be a single line in an article under a Trivia subheading, but not it's own article. Ned Scott 03:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * still think it should be deleted, but I am seeing the others' points and don't think this article is as harmful as I thought it would be. -- Ned Scott 04:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I retract my vote all together. I still don't know if it should be deleted or kept, but the comments here and revised version have changed my mind that my original reasons for nomination have changed. Or something like that. -- Ned Scott 09:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think it's notable enough.   dbtfz talk 04:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Like most fancruft, it's not interesting to those who aren't hardcore fans, and most hardcore fans already know about it, so there's no point to its existence.  Delete all fancruft. Brian G. Crawford, the so-called &quot;Nancy Grace of AfD&quot; 04:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's not like it was a one-episode thing. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 04:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems notable enough, is well-written to boot. Just a comment: I found it interesting and I've never seen a Buffy episode in my life. Crystallina 04:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment please, I beg of you Buffy fans, do not take this as an attack against the show. I've seen it, I thought it was good, I have nothing against it.  I have nominated similar articles for deletion that were about shows that I was a huge fan of.  And giving an element of a show it's own article doesn't make it more or less important or even signify any such thing.  I bet Buffy wore shoes on more than one episode, but you don't see List of Buffy's shoes, do you?  These kinds of articles hurt both Wikipedia and the integrity of the topics at hand, including all things Buffy.  STOP HURTING BUFFY. -- Ned Scott 04:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Best response ever. For the record, I wouldn't vote keep on Buffy's shoes.  --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 04:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Like Crystallina, I've never watched the show (though I do know that it's extremely popular and influential). I just think that, like Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem, this is a perfectly legitimate article about a fictional band.   dbtfz talk 04:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Let the dingoes have it but give Daniel "Oz" Osbourne the left-overs (that's Delete and Merge). Eivindt@c 04:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Expand to inlcude more non-buffy references. U$er 04:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment non-Buffy stuff would be more appropriate for Azaria Chamberlain disappearance -- Ned Scott 04:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Edited


 * Votes made after this point were the ones made after the article received some major improvements

Personally I think it was OK to start with and still deserved to be kept, but I just made a major updating of the article anyway (so check it out again) including a table listing all their appearences and all their songs. They were a pretty big part of Buffy IMO, and this article is very useful to people want to know more about this fictional band, or track down the real thing. Also they were pretty good -- Paxomen 05:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is a notable fictional band, and it is a legitimate article. Carioca 05:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Carioca and Paxomen, and for the record whenver you vote to delete a Buffy article, Buffy kills a vampire. Oh wait, that would be a good thing. Hmm, let me think about that and get back to you... JoshuaZ 05:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep As an Oz-tralian myself who well remembers the Chamberlain case, and also no particular fan of Buffy (looks around nervously for possible bolts of lightning from the heavens - or hells), I say it's a still a notable enough article which may need a bit of clean-up (agree with Ned that non-Buffy references belong in Azaria Chamberlain disappearance, not here) but doesn't deserve deletion. Cheers, Ian Rose 07:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable enough to keep, too long to merge. --Icarus 09:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep moderately notable. Chairman S.  Talk  10:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable fictional band. --Ter e nce Ong 11:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, with apologies to Buffy fans, but I don't regard this as encylopedic. WP:NOT the ultimate tome of pop culture. Being named after notable event has no bearing. Possibly worth mention within existing Buffy pages.  D ei z io  17:37, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep.> — Preceding unsigned comment added by FLASHY FUNKMAN (talk • contribs) 20:22, 25 March 2006
 * Keep Recent edits are an improvement, and I like this kind of "cross-section" documentation.--TJ 12:42, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep This is an important band in the Buffy world, at least in seasons 2 and 3. I don't see how it could be easily merged, either. Abhorsen327 22:44, 28 March 2006 (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.