Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Chappelle's Show skits


 * 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..  Citi Cat   ♫ 20:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

List of Chappelle's Show skits
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - Wikipedia articles are not plot summaries. Otto4711 17:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is obviously a spin-out from Chappelle's Show, in keeping with Summary style.  —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete although enjoyable this is not suitable for an encyclopedia. Bigdaddy1981 04:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this is content appropriate for a fan cite, not an encyclopedia.  Merge the notable ones back into the main article, but delete this article per WP:FICT (as in lack of notability for a list of the show's skits) Corpx 04:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NOT and does not follow WP:WAF. Per Corpx, merge notable skits back to the main article and delete the list. bwowen talk•contribs• review me please! 13:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Note that WP:NOT requires that articles "should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot." Article in question says things like, "This sketch was featured in the first episode and helped Chappelle gain significant notoriety", "All of the lines were improvised; Mooney received sole writing credit", "The sketch is a spoof on the Players Ball, an annual gathering of pimps", "Ironically, shows with a similar premise were later released", etc etc, all of this is clearly context and analysis. Eleland 14:33, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eleland. I'm all for the deletion of listcruft, but this contains extensive prose analysis that goes far beyond simple guide listing of the episodes and their plots. Factors such as production and release history, real world reactions by fans and the subjects of the sketches,  and numerous other facts are in every entry.  VanTucky  (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Pointless, non-encyclopaedic.--Bedivere 21:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The list is not exhaustive and does not ignore analysis, which leads me to believe it is not simply a plot summary of the show. If there is cleanup to be done, that need not be effected through AfD. Dekimasu よ! 06:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep -- per Eleland. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 01:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom Harlowraman 17:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete What isn't plot summary is original analysis.  --Phirazo 21:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It lacks citations now, but that doesn't mean that such documentation doesn't exist; in this case, it seems likely that sources could be found. Dekimasu よ! 17:12, 25 August 2007 (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.