Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths in The Sopranos series (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 delete. Arguments for keeping appear to have been refuted. Core desat 03:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

List of deaths in The Sopranos series
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I am nominating this article for deletion because it is not notable, it is not verifiable, and it is indiscriminate in terms of plot detail and statistics. First of all, WP:N requires for a topic to establish notability through significant coverage by multiple reliable sources. The article is only supported by a Flash presentation by CBS News. The article simultaneously does not meet WP:V with the lack of secondary sources, which leads to WP:IINFO. In-universe information is supposed to be supplied to complement real-world context of the topic (and the topic cannot exist here due to lack of notability). Instead, there exist statistics without verifiable explanatory text at List of deaths in The Sopranos series. I recognize that death is a common theme in The Sopranos, but this non-notable list of indiscriminate in-universe information gives no encyclopedic insight about this theme. A better approach would be to use academic studies of how the TV series has depicted death sequences, which would qualify as real-world context. This existing list does not warrant encyclopedic inclusion for this multitude of reasons. Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * This nomination is now properly transcluded – the old discussion was transcluded before. BencherliteTalk 00:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - indiscriminate list; fancruft. Biruitorul 00:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's not indiscriminate - the list has a clear focus. And it is obviously verifiable.  And there's adequate notability and sourcing, like the CBS News coverage.  Colonel Warden 00:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The article only uses primary sources, the TV series itself, to cover the topic. There's a failure to use secondary sources, and there needs to be multiple reliable sources providing significant coverage of this topic.  This hasn't been the case.  In addition, there is no real-world context -- it's indiscriminate in that sense, having only plot information per WP:PLOT, and it has a blatant "Statistics" section.  There is no encyclopedic support for such a list. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:33, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There's plenty of secondary material out there because deaths in the se ries are so significant. For example, Over the years The Sopranos has been known for its high body count. In honor of the series finale, take a look back at some memorable deaths..., Review of Psychology Of The Sopranos: Love, Death, Desire and Betrayal in America's Favorite Gangster Family in Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, Death on Sopranos..., Whacked Sopranos reflect... Colonel Warden 08:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I suggested in the previous AfD, a Death in The Sopranos prose article would be completely appropriate. That would definitely provide encyclopedic insight through the application of real-world context.  Here, there is an indiscriminate compilation of plot detail, with no secondary sources used.  In-universe information is supposed to complement verifiable content from reliable sources about the topic -- here, it's serving as the core content instead, with little to no real-world perspectives about any of these deaths except for the original research laden in the Statistics section.  I understand that information may seem "cool" or "useful" to Sopranos fans as reflected in the last AfD, but Wikipedia articles need to fit the five pillars in providing encyclopedic content.  If a reader unfamiliar with The Sopranos comes by, all he or she will find is a re-hashing of plot detail without real-world context to back it up.  It seems that this kind of list would be far more suitable for a place like the Sopranos Wikia.  My suggestion is to establish a Death in the Sopranos if the theme is so notable, and provide a link to the list of deaths at the Sopranos Wikia in the External links section.  That way, encyclopedic coverage can be provided about the theme, and the list will be just an additional click away on a wikia that would embrace its content. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 13:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:FICT, fails the general notability guideline as well. Fails WP:V, there is a lot of information uncited that isn't IU information, like for instance David Chase telling actors far in advance when they are going to die. "Aprile Curse"?? A lot of the "Statistics" section looks like original research to me. Also, Wikipedia isn't a substitute for watching the show. Knowing who died in a show is not relevant. Death on a show is not relevant without context. There is no context explaining why "death" on The Sopranoes is a relevant encyclopedic topic. You want to mention who dies, then put it in the plot section of the episode list.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  00:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is definitely indiscriminate information, and no real notability for this in-universe list. Crazysuit 06:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete fancruft. Doczilla 08:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The nom sums it up very nicely. Not notable and is OR.  Nuke it.  Æon  Insanity Now!  19:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Also, for the characters who are notable enough to be mentioned in an existing article, it can say which episode they died in. For others... well, if they weren't notable enough for their lives to merit inclusion, why should their deaths? :-D Ombudstheman 22:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep would be fine at The Sopranos and this is a reasonable way to keep that article manageable in size. JJL 23:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's not indiscriminate; it's quite specific:list of deaths in a particular TV show. Personally I think it should be limited to on-screen deaths, and the Statistics section should go, but that's not a reason to delete the whole article. Labelling it "fancruft" is not a valid reason either. "Whacking" is obviously an integral part of anything to do with gangsters and the Sopranos is no different. It's perfectly reasonable to have an article on it. As has been pointed out above there are plenty of secondary sources available.Pawnkingthree 00:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's indiscriminate in the sense that it's merely plot detail and statistics. Like I said, the secondary sources could be used to write a prose article about the theme of death in The Sopranos, but it doesn't warrant this indiscriminate list that has no real world context.  Just because an act is a common occurrence in a TV series does not mean they all have to be listed -- this would mean ER should have a list of all the surgeries that took place in the show, that soap operas should list all the specific instances of backstabbing, that Star Wars films should list all the specific instances in which The Force was used.  There are no secondary sources used for each little entry that keep this list from being an indiscriminate re-hashing of plot detail.  Please read #2 at WP:PLOT -- "Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their 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. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series."  A compilation of deaths in the overall plot of The Sopranos without any of the requisite encyclopedic insight qualifies as indiscriminate. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I'd support such an article only for a very notable series--such as this. One of the criteria for a list is useful, and this is certainly useful in keeping track of the plot and the characters. And it seems secondary sourcing has been found. If it were list of deaths in televisions series, then possibly one could validly say "indiscriminate"--not here, limited to one particular series. DGG (talk) 00:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * A topic only needs to meet the notability criteria -- it doesn't matter if it's "very notable" compared to any other topic that meets the same criteria. Just because a TV series is popular doesn't mean it's OK to indiscriminately list plot detail as opposed to a deleting a similar list under a lesser-known TV series, provided that both of their general topics meet the notability criteria.  Such a perspective fails to be neutral.  Also, WP:USEFUL is not an argument, as a directory of New York phone numbers is useful, too -- the list still fails to provide verifiable content from reliable secondary sources to establish either the notability of this specific list or to provide real-world context per WP:PLOT -- it's still a re-hashing of plot detail, no matter whether this show is popular or not.  If producers elaborated on their approach in deciding on the how and why of each character's death, that would be appropriate encyclopedic content.  However, none of the listings provide any sort of out-of-universe information besides the episode in which the death occurred.  Like I said before, this list can be transwiki'ed to the Sopranos Wikia due to the fans' policy-disregarding desire for such information.  As I mentioned in my initial argument, the list fails to be notable, verifiable, or discriminate.  The show's so-called popularity -- WP:WELIKEIT -- does not address the arguments I've put forth. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:00, 5 November 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.