Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural references to "All your base are belong to us" (2nd 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 was: It's clear from prior precedent and consensus here that this huge list of indiscriminate trivia simply does not belong, but a well-sourced paragraph or two could probably be written explaining and summing up the spread and influence of this phrase through popular culture, so I've moved it to a subpage of the talk page so that such a section can be written. Krimpet (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

List of cultural references to "All your base are belong to us"

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - nominated once previously and closed no consensus, improve sourcing. The sourcing has not improved, and the article remains an indiscriminate list and a directory of loosely-associated topics. The items listed here are unrelated to each other in any way beyond happening to use a particular faddish catch phrase. A number of the listed items are not uses of the catch phrase at all but are instead things that in the original-research point of view of some editor resembles or sounds sorta like the catch phrase. In summary, a solid mass of indiscriminate poorly- and un-sourced trivia. Strongly oppose merging any of this information back to the main article on the catch phrase. Unsourced trivial garbage doesn't belong in the main article any more than it belongs in its own article. Otto4711 15:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --GreenJoe 15:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The only reason why we have an article on All your base are belong to us in the first instance is that the phrase has become a staple of net-based culture, widely repeated and parodied.  If it is thought that this information is "indiscriminate" or "loosely organized" (currently used as to try to make the traditional "cruft" argument sound more like "policy" and less like WP:IDONTLIKEIT), then the article in chief should be deleted as well.  Most of the entries in the list are largely self-validating in any case.  If it is thought that this data is too disorganized to appear in the article in chief, the right thing to do would be to move it to a subpage of the talk page for the convenience of future editors. - Smerdis of Tlön 17:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - arguing for the preservation of this article based on the possibility of the main article's being deleted is a variation of WP:ALLORNOTHING and is not convincing. WP:NOT is policy, as is WP:NOT; WP:CRUFT and WP:ILIKEIT are not. Characterizing policy arguments as a case of cruft by any other name or whatever is a mischaracterization of the argument, one which, assuming good faith, I will assume is based on a misunderstanding of the argument and not a willful attempt at misrepresentation. I do not agree that it is a good idea to make it convenient for editors to add garbage that will never be sourced to the main article or any other article. Otto4711 17:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Calling the factual data that other editors have added or tried to add to any article "garbage" strikes me as deeply uncivil, and it began when this AfD was opened.   On the other hand, I have tried to remain constructive and suggest the right thing to do with "popular culture" sections that other editors find poorly organized.  Perhaps it is time for a moratorium on the forking of popular culture lists or proposing their deletion. - Smerdis of Tlön 18:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. I think the whole thing trivial garbage. --Agamemnon2 18:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge To the main article. Edison 19:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep AYBABTU (you should know what that stands for) Is a very notable and is a very common in popular culture. It has real world significance, it just needs cleanup thats all. DBZROCKS 20:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The actual article that is about AYBABTU covers the notability of the catch phrase. That the catch phrase is notable does not mean that every single time that the catch phrase or something similar to the catch phrase appears anywhere at any time in anything is notable. The passing trivial references to the phrase do not inherit notability from the phrase itself. Otto4711 21:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * merge per Edison & per WP:FICT, which this is. Carlossuarez46 21:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I haven't changed my opinion from when I nominated it the first time. It is an indiscriminate list that could cover any verifiable instance in which someone used AYB (or "for great justice," etc.). ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 02:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Also (I almost forgot), per Lists (stand-alone lists): "Ideally each entry on the list should have a Wikipedia article but this is not required if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. The items on this list have no chance of becoming articles. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 15:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Most of the list items have articles within the information either Wikipedia or News outlets. An example of this is in the television section - in order Futurama; two news sources; Static Shock; Ripley's Believe it or Not; Megas XLR; Whatever Happened to Robot Jones?; Pani Poni Dash!; Berserk; "Ill Suited" of Kim Possible.TheSun 04:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep It's notable, and it's fun (unlike the great bulk of boring Wikipedia articles).--Mike18xx 08:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - please cite a reliable source that attests to the notability of, for instance, this item from the list: In Series 1 TiVo PVRs, if backdoors are enabled then 17 presses of the Channel/Page Down button on the System Information screen (from the first page of System Information) will cause the message "All your tuners are belong to US" to be displayed. Otto4711 12:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I came across this article because I was looking up AYB references. Shows it has some purpose to me... Ian ¹³  /t  16:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * delete - as sprawling trivia -- Whpq 20:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Relatively Strong Keep - It's an important to internet and non-internet culture and has been discussed in or referenced by many notable parts of society (games, movies, websites, authors). TheSun 04:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And again, there is an article about the phrase itself. The article about the phrase itself is not being considered for deletion and it is in the article on the phrase itself that the notability of the phrase is established. Otto4711 13:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Then the list of cultural references should be Merged with the article TheSun 17:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The article was kept last time conditioned on the sourcing being improved. The sourcing has not been improved. Unsourced information should not be merged to other articles. Otto4711 19:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge with main article. This is an interesting and informative list but it doesn't merit its own separate page from the normal AYB page. It would be great if it wasn't just a "Trivia" section, but I feel like that's unavoidable, and there is salvageable information here.  b w o w e n  T / C  06:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete useless information that has no purpose beyond being trivial. The Filmaker 20:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Shows how large of a meme AYB really is, but is too large for the original article. Geshpenst 02:38, 21 May 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.