Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fifth wall


 * 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. , but suggest considering a merge to fourth wall.  MBisanz  talk 06:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Fifth wall

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable neologism which has not received substantial coverage from reliable sources. After searching online, I found some references to the term "fifth wall" in a Shakespearean context, but they do not appear to have any relation to the usage indicated by this article. There were zero reliable references that mention this term at all in the way the article uses it. The actual content is an original research definition followed by an extensive list of unreferenced, likely unverifiable trivia and speculation, mostly of the sort "here's something I saw in a movie/cartoon/tv show that I like which may be related to something else I like". I removed the listing of cruft and tagged the article a few times, but those edits were consistently reverted so I raised my concerns on the talk page. There has been no response there and realistically I don't see how this article can be brought up to policy considering the lack of available sources, so I am bringing it to AFD. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 00:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC) Theatre Research International (2008), 33:127-144 Cambridge University Press Copyright © International Federation for Theatre Research 2008  doi:10.1017/S0307883308003647 "The aim of this article to show that the space of the stage and the ways it is constructed are an important, meaning-generating element of every production. The space of the stage is seen as an artistic construct, the aim of which is to convey senses relevant to the goals of the director. The function of the scenic space goes far beyond a mere ‘representation’ of some fictional inhabited space; it has the ability to convey meanings that, among other things, evoke metaphorical readings. [blah blah blah] Golikov has introduced a scene in which the Euclidean geometry falls apart, and instead a simultaneous presentation of two subjective perspectives is provided [blah blah....] The essay raises theoretical issues connected with time and space in theatre." --Skandha101 06:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skandha101 (talk • contribs)
 * Merge - into fourth wall if sources can be found to verify the term.  Jd 027  talk 01:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  -- &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  01:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a commonly used concept and it shouldn't be too hard to produce references for it. Majoreditor (talk) 01:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked and didn't find any. Can you produce references that use this term in the context of the article? Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 02:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite  apparently a major critical concept, but it does not mean what this article says it does--rather it means anything taking place offstage.  has a number of good references. Time travel would perhaps be one of those but I havent seen it given as such yet. DGG (talk) 02:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * None of the items returned in that search talk about the "fifth wall" in the context of the article. In fact, it's a mishmash of random usages. The phrase "fifth wall" has no set meaning; it's just used here and there, usually in passing, in any number of fields. No sources devote specific attention to the phrase itself. It fails WP:NEO. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 02:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that was a gunshot approach, but I have to agree with DGG. Despite the fact that sometimes fifth wall references are to literal walls, and often to the ceiling of a space as a design element, one of those cites is relevant [also see additional discussion from me at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fifth_wall] :
 * I looked through the sources you found and mentioned on the talk page. I am going to respond here to keep the discussion in one place.
 * The first three links (from gbooks) may be useful sources, but they have nothing to do with the current usage of the phrase in the article and they are probably not enough on their own to establish the phrase's notability, they appear to use the term simply to advance discussion of something else. Everything else (all links past the section break) is either promotional for places or companies that call themselves "Fifth Wall" or unreliable blogs/self-published sites which cannot be the basis for an articles. I don't think there's enough to establish notability or common usage of the term. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, and being less caffeinated today, I am finding it harder to be impressed that much of the current article is worth keeping. (And, "proliferant"?)  To the extent that fifth wall is used in the real world, I'd have to agree that the article's alignment with the examples (including those I've cited) is pretty weak.--Skandha101 • 23:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I am conflicted on this. It clearly is not the "fourth wall," which has had its own problems with original research examples added by Wikipedia editors. Where is a reliable source describing a "fifth wall" as what separates an actor's portrayals of different characters in different fictional universes? Yet it is a meaningful concept, and I would be surprised if no reliable source ever had reviews or criticism about it. Perhaps a different term is used. Edison (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup By finding some real sources Jwray (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as tvtropes - style original research if no real sources are provided. What do you get for googling "shatner" + "fifth wall"? I don't understand the point of "keep and rewrite", either rewrite it now or let's delete it without prejudice to a sourced article about a completely different topic with the same name. Nerfari (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, it does seem to exist as a frequent trope/metaphor if nothing else. However, nobody seems to have an interest or capability in aligning it, more coherently, with typical usage.  (Or am I wrong?  It's certainly an interesting concept, but yet, as it is, it is trivia soup and vagueness.) --Skandha101 • 23:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Until someone comes up with third party sources that name the idea you're espousing in this essay the "Fifth Wall", we can't create an encyclopedia article about it. A troll through Google Scholar came up with engineering references (like "after installing the fourth wall and before installing the sixth wall, you have to install the fifth wall"), and JSTOR came up only with references to a theater group named "The Fifth Wall". Unless you can show that responsible professionals in theater or literary studies actually call this concept the "Fifth Wall", preferably in peer-reviewed publications, we can't just accept this cause it's a good idea.  Once you go out and establish this idea in the world outside wikipedia, only then can we write an article about it.  T L Miles (talk) 00:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Clarification: I'm perfectly willing to change my opinion and help adding references, but the first two examples refer to two different concepts, neither of which appears to me (ignorant completely of theatre terminiology) as the concept proposed in this page. The Shakespeare book seems the best bet, but it defines the concept as the "distance between the performer or critic and the audience".  It also discusses the concept quite a bit.  The second has one mention of "the fifth wall" where a critic is quoted proposing a meaning as "silence".  That really can't contribute much. Per the google searches: they all define it differently.  The Hunt work uses the term in relation to the shadow screen in Puppet Theatre.  The Frencophone Africa work says " Soyinka establishes a fifth wall between the audience and the action, instead of creating a conventional living room space."  Other uses include a 1962 German article which uses it as a metaphor, different from the article, books about design which call floor decorating the fifth wall, or references to at least two theatre troupes called "The Fifth Wall".  I'm willing to accept this is a widely used term, but please propose what is actually means and provide some sources that support that meaning.  The best bet appears to be the meaning defined in Hunter & Lichtenfels (2005), but it is a different meaning than that described in the article.T L Miles (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Found one other mention: Theodore Sturgeon, Paul Williams, Larry McCaffery. Perfect Host. A playwright on page 373 is described as breaking the fifth wall between playwright and audience, becoming a character himself.  Is this the meaning intended in the article? It's pretty tedious, though.  One mention in one work, where the writer has to define the term, before moving on and not using it again?  It really does sound like a neologism: perhaps an irresistibly named one (due to the ubiquity of the Fourth wall concept), but if there's no accepted definition, how can we write an article describing it? T L Miles (talk) 16:46, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: after re-reading the article and the history on Fourth wall, I gotta stick with Delete. The proposed meaning of "a meeting of characters from two different fictional universes"  is entirely unsupported by any sources, and further is an entirely different meaning from meanings proposed in the third party references proffered here. I'm afraid it is a neologism.T L Miles (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as the history of the neologism has historical sources yet to be added. Nom quite happily found some. Per search on Google Books: "Shakespeare, language and the stage: the fifth wall, approaches to Shakespeare from criticism, performance and theatre studies" ISBN 1904271499 and "Composing for voice" ISBN 0415941873. The concept goes back quite a ways in theater. The article needs editing to place history of the concept in context with its current usage as exemplified by "Fifth Wall" references found in Chud, film, stage blogs, etc. As an actor, I can attest to the concept being quite real and seperate from "Fourth Wall". Needs major cleanup.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 02:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Outside of the Shakespearean usage, which has nothing to do with this article, the "current usage" as you put it is not established in the least. You cite a single DVD review which uses the phrase merely in passing in a parenthesized aside where the meaning isn't clear, a non-notable movie called the "5th Wall", and a tongue in cheek blog post which is borderline nonsensical. None of those are any basis for an article. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep' and clean-up. Perfectly notable subject in theatre and fiction. here's a couple dozen regarding the firth wall and theater and a similar amount with theatre, and 50 regarding books, and film and finally fiction. -- Banj e  b oi   07:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Despite the addition of extra words, those are still simply google searches. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Those are google book searches which seems to indicate plenty of reliable sources are readily available. We wouldn't be here had the nom done a similar search before taking this to AFD. -- Banj e  b oi   02:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My redirect was reverted, my tagging was reverted, my trimming was reverted. I did search (and I actually *gasp* looked at the results!) and it came up dry, I brought up my concerns on the talk page, I gave it some time. No one gave a shit beyond simply reverting to the original research, cruft-laden mess. My only option was AFD. No sources use the term in the context of the article. It's not a widely used phrase in any context as far as I can tell. It fails several policies. And you're here linking to google searches that I've already seen, talking about how I should have taken measures that I took 2 weeks ago. Good work. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 03:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You have a unique take on collaborating with others so please allow me to show you how others may see your bold editing style. Your first edit was to effectively delete the whole article with a redirect, that was reverted; You then deleted every example presented - which were all reasonably well-written and sourceable to the original media - characterizing them as WP:Cruft and slapping on four tags to the article. Things went downhill from there. Perhaps your vision of what other editors should do with their energy here isn't shared by everyone else. It's interesting to direct volunteer energy but if one truly wants to be a leader you also need to accept that sometimes a leader directing everyone else's work isn't needed. Personally, I would have added refimprove and simply removed vandalize for the next few months in hopes that the right editor came along and helped the article progress. Sure, it may not have caused as much excitement but we'd likely be in a bit better place. I'll see if I can't add a source or two myself. I really know little about the subject but I'll try. -- Banj e  b oi   11:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think the topic is a notable phrase/concept. If I wasn't willing to give the article a chance then I would've immediately AFDed it instead of attempting any sort of improvement route. You're still not addressing the fact that the term isn't used anywhere in the context of the article and it doesn't appear to an established phrase in reliable sources in any field. What precisely are you going to write an article about? Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Outdent. We'll have to agree to disagree I'm afraid. I've found piles of references that show the term has been widely used at least back into the 1960s and the concept should be clarified to it's usages with arguably the Shakespeare fifth wall book and workshops as an anchor. There's nothing wrong with a good article stating although the phrase has meant different things in various field the theatrical definition remains the most enduring. -- Banj e  b oi   02:41, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you think any of the current content should remain? Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:03, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes actually. I think the lede is a bit inaccurate but the article at least suggests the concept and examples in theory can help clarify to our readers who relate to pop culture references. If I were more read up i think I would tweak the lede to state that the concept has been used in various fields but fictional and theatrical usages speak to the theory and practice while design industries trend toward the phrase as a literal "wall' to also be considered when putting together a room - that is a ceiling and a floor can also be considered a fifth wall. -- Banj e  b oi   01:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

the continuing conversation
Unfortunately, I've been adding comments here as well as the article talk page. Which is the preferred forum when an afd debate is current? I've summarized my most recent thoughts there Talk:Fifth_wall. My last thought there was that perhaps this is just another instance of metafictional technique, and as such should be rolled into Metafiction (to the extent that it can coherently be summarized). 'Metafiction' isn't a great article, in my opinion, but may be a better place. On the other hand, it wouldn't stretch sense too much (again, IMO) to have a fifth wall entry, but with little else but the uses we've seen adduced so far (more documentation likely exists, but, it would take more digging). --Skandha101 • 22:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: My understanding from what you've written is "this is a real concept, but different from the one described here". My quick troll through online searches makes me think you're right.  The problem is, of the several meaning in the academic literature offered, I don't know which one folks are talking about when they say that this is a well known theatre concept.  My only advice is to either let this get deleted and recreate it later once you've found good references for a clear concept delineated by experts in the field.  Or you can (right now) erase most of what's written there now and replace it with something short, accurate, consistent, and supported by more than a couple of references.  If you can find a couple of books or peer-reviewed articles that unquestionably support a single definition, you should rewrite this asap! T L Miles (talk) 01:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to fourth-wall. This article belongs as part of the parent topic and the topic deserves a mention within it.  Them  From  Space  21:49, 21 March 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.