Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Caitlin's Way episodes


 * 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 Speedy keep, nominator withdraws with no other comments advocating delete. (non-admin closure) Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 22:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

List of Caitlin&
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The article has no sources, it has nothing to verify any of the content. Even if it did, it's an entirely unnecessary content fork of the Caitlin's Way article. Prod was removed. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. Two problems with your nomination. First, you are not claiming (nor do I think you could) that this information is unverifiable, only that it is not verified at present beyond citations to the episodes themselves (which presumably verify the episodes' titles). It is unlikely that there is no source in existence that could verify the broadcast dates and episode titles of a television series that aired on a major cable network, and that these sources have not yet been added is not grounds for deletion because it's a surmountable problem. Second, whether or not it is "necessary" to have split this off from the main Caitlin's Way article is a question of article size; see WP:CFORK ("...as an article grows, editors often create Summary style spin-offs or new, linked article for related material. This is acceptable, and often encouraged, as a way of making articles clearer and easier to manage."), WP:SPINOUT, and Summary style. At most, if it isn't "necessary" to maintain this separately, then it would just be merged back into the parent article, and per WP:ATD you still don't have a deletion candidate. postdlf (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, by all means merge it but it is currently unverified by anything and asserts no notability as far as I can see. This kind of "normal behaviour" of spinning off episode lists with no sources is diabolical and should be avoided.  Note:  I listed it here as a removed prod, so while your "problems" with my nomination are certainly fascinating, I'm doing this procedurally.  If you give a damn about keeping this as a standalone list, at least have the courtesy to put in some verifiable reliable sources... Cheers!!  The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Withdraw nomination. Will follow the reasonable advice of two seasoned editors and propose a merger. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 13 June 2012 (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.