Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragon Ball in Popular Culture


 * 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 as fancruft. Errant (chat!) 19:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Dragon Ball in Popular Culture

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Once you remove all of the statements that aren't sourced the reliable, third-party sources, there is not much left for a proper list article. The list is almost entirely pop culture trivia that is based on "I saw this here" form of orignal research without having any form of notability. —Farix (t &#124; c) 00:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- —Farix (t &#124; c) 00:50, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Dragon Ball. This may be salvageable but right now there are not enough sources listed for a stub let alone a split. – Allen4names 16:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect. If there are any notable pop culture references, include them in their own section entitled In popular culture. For example, what is the notability of, say, IT'S OVER 9000!!! as an Internet meme? Something to think about. --  M  (speak/spoken) 01:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete- as Farix says, this is typical fan gushing of the "OMG they mention Dragonball here!" kind. It's original research. Reyk  YO!  01:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I contacted the author of the page about this AFD, since no one had. Using primary sources is fine if there is no reasonable doubt of the information presented in it.  How a series has influenced other notable series is always an encyclopedic topic.  The study of popular culture is taught at most major colleges.   D r e a m Focus  05:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, primary sources are not enough to justify an article. Per our verifiability policy, "If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.". Reyk  YO!  05:35, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Entries in pop culture articles or sections should never be based on primary sourced. This invites too much trivia and "I saw this here" cruft. Without secondary sources, there is no way to determine if the references are significant to be noted in an encyclopedia. —Farix (t &#124; c) 11:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Arbitrary list with arbitrary inclusion from primary sources (as pointed above -- fan made "I saw it here" list). This would belong (in a much shorter version) in Dragon Ball article's "cultural influences" section if backed up by secondary references about this. — HELL KNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as above; non-notable fancruft. Gold Hat (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:FANCRUFT. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:49, 26 February 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.