Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series (second 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. Cúchullain t/ c 04:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a real bad case of listcruft. While the article itself isn't TOO bad (and if it survives this nomination, I'd be willing to go through and clean it up), I fail to see the necessity of having so much duplicate information on another article, where the movie articles have enough information in them as it is. Because I've completely botched the listing, this is the first nomination. Mo0 [ talk ] 01:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support deletion - While I believe in the notability of "Friday the 13th deaths", I don't think we need a list telling us every single death in the franchise. The films have been reemed for their use of gore and obligatory death scenes, and I think that should be noted in a prose section on the film series page.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 01:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and Merge into List of films by gory death scene MetsFan76 14:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you don't mean merge the entire list? A lot of those deaths are repetative.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 14:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I will reiterate my voice in the first AfD and say Delete this article. Nothing in it has changed - it is still a laundry list of people who died in a horror film of all things.  It's what horror films are about, so isn't a list of deaths in a horror film superfluous?  Lists should not be an indiscriminate collection of facts, and what could be more indiscriminate than deaths in a horror flick?  A r k y a n  &#149; (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per WP:FICT. This is what amounts to a list of characters for the film series. Character lists are perfectly appropriate for Wikipedia as evidenced by Category:Lists of fictional characters by series. The list should be moved to List of deaths in the Friday the 13th film series to distinguish it from the TV series of the same name. Whatever happens, do not merge to List of films by gory death scene. Otto4711 17:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The first step is not to create a page for minor characters, but see if they can be listed on the film's article itself. Seeing as no 1 film has a list of minor characters that is too long to be on the page, I don't see why they need their own page. Second, being fictional, when writing about fiction you don't just write the fictional part and leave it. This is an encyclopedia, and I see hardly any evidence of encyclopedic content in this article. The encyclopedic content of this article is something that this article symbolizes, not what this article literally shows. What I mean is, this article symbolizes what F13 is famous for, gory, graphic deaths. Some of the deaths are noted on certain "top scary moment"-esque shows. Kevin Bacon's death is a very recognized scene, the death of Brenda...not so much. As I said before, it's something that should be written in prose, with reliable sources, discussing the nature of the deaths, the reaction by critics and the MPAA by the graphicness of them, and that's it. A list of every stupid little death is not important. Part 5 had what, 3 people killed by their eyes cut out. This is encyclopedic how? It's redundant deaths. The one about the girl being killed because she got caught in the blast of the shotgun in Jason Goes to Hell? That's not even "related" to the main character of the series. We might as well have a "List of deaths in Die Hard" page. Or, "List of deaths in Harry Potter".  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 18:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether one should or shouldn't create a list article for minor characters (and there is nothing that I can find that indicates one shouldn't; as noted, WP:FICT actively encourages creating them rather than stubby articles for each one), this list exists. It does not appear to violate any Wikipedia policy or guideline and frankly the attitude expressed toward it by some of the people in this AFD indicate a strong willingness to ignore policy and guidelines in favor of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Calling the content "stupd little deaths" is rather telling. As for making similar articles for Die Hard or Harry Potter, I have no problem with that. It's just one more way of organizing the information on the characters. Which remains the point, that this is a character list which happens to consist of characters who are killed. If the list were called List of Friday the 13th film characters I doubt anyone who's declaiming against it would care. Otto4711 22:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No, WP:FICT states that it should only be its own page when it doesn't fit in the article. I don't know about you, but last time I checked not a single F13 film article was bordering on excessive length. Secondly, having a "list of deaths" is like have a "list of every scene in this film" page. It's one thing to have a list of characters page where you can talk about the character, give some actor insight into the character, etc. A list of deaths is nothing more than a list of plot points, a list of scenes from a film. Where is the notability in listing 189 deaths in detail? None. You'll vote to delete a "list of magazine covers" but not a list of deaths? Fictional deaths at that. Wikipedia is not a repository for Friday the 13th deaths. This list bypasses the "list of characters" information and just wants to include fancruft. Also, don't try and pass judgement. I love the series, I own them all, but I know pointless fancruft when I see it. Again, the notability behind the theme of death is one thing, listing every single death in a film is another. Remember, "Wikipedia is not a substitution for watching the film," and a list of deaths is providing that substitution.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 22:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The exact wording of WP:FICT is Minor characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters." This list should reside in the article relating to the work itself, unless it becomes long, in which case a separate article for the list is good practice. This article covers the entire film series. The article on the film series, Friday the 13th (film series) would be overwhelmed if this list were included in it. I did not suggest that you don't like the films. I suggest that you don't like the list and your dislike of the list is leading you to endorse deletion when no valid deletion criterion has been offered. "Fancruft" is a lazy argument and it is not a valid deletion criterion. As to how I vote on any other article, that's irrelevant. Each article is supposed to be judged on its own merits and you've said nothing that demonstrates the need to delete this article. Otto4711 23:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I say it's fancruft, then it is to me. That's my opinion, and I don't believe that my vote said anything about cruft in it. I dont't think calling any argument "lazy" follows that civility policy you were flashing around at RGTraynor. Regardless, the "list" is broken up by films, thus the "minor characters" would be on each respective films page. This list is nothing more than the cast from the film articles. Listing deaths is not notable, you might as well list every scene in a film. "Deaths" are nothing more than scenes, and thus this list is nothing more than an ill contrived substitution for watching the movies, which is something that Wikipedia is not. As for your "valid deletion criterion offered", I think what's really going on here is that 6 other people believe there is valid deletion criterion here, and 1 person doesn't.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 23:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You are certainly free to believe that it's cruft, as long as you understand that "cruft" is not a criterion for deletion. Sorry if you think that calling an argument lazy is being uncivil.
 * Now, if your contention is now that the article is a "cast list," well, we have those too. See Category:Actors by film series. In fact, cast lists are now the preferred manner of keeping that information on Wikipedia, in place of the categories we previously had and which are all in the process of being listified and deleted.
 * As for the idea that these are nothing but plot summaries, I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. All we know from the list is the name of the character and the implement of his or her death. We do not know any other details of the scenes nor do we know any details of the scenes in which a death did not occur. They are not substitutes for the plots of the films and people reading the article will not know the plots.
 * As for the numbers game, Wikipedia isn't a democracy and AFD is not a vote. Otto4711 04:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If you are going to try and dismantle my discussion, at least try and quote me right. I said it's nothing but plot points, not a summary, that is completely different. As for the "cast list being preferred", why don't you look at what a cast list entails, and then compare that to this article...not the same.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 10:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - per WP:NOT. I'm not seeing any assertion of encyclopedic importance here. Not every random fact pop-culture-wise is of encyclopedic importance, and surely this is redundant info: we must have this information elsewhere in the articles about the films? Wikipedia is not a collection of plot summaries, either. Moreschi Request a recording? 18:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyone who's followed my AFDs knows how I love citing WP:NOT but I don't see how a list of characters which is tightly bounded in scope and complete (pending another sequel) can be considered indiscriminate. If this were "list of deaths in horror films" then yes, and I firmly believe that List of films by gory death scene should have been deleted ages ago for being indiscriminate, but character lists are allowed and are indeed encouraged over individual minor character articles. This article is not a plot summary or collection of plot summaries either, as they provide little or no information about the plots of the films, just the character names and manners of death. Otto4711 18:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. While restraining my disgust over what someone must be thinking to lovingly create such a list, it's just an indiscriminate collection of info, and I can't imagine what possible encyclopedic use it might have.  (No, I'll think you're a liar if you try to tell me that you really had a burning desire to know who was killed in F13 movies and how.)  RGTraynor 18:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Please express your opinion in a civil fashion. Otto4711 18:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Which I did. How's that assuming good faith working for you?  (And one wonders if you'd have said anything were you not strongly supporting this article, but I should assume good faith my own self.)  RGTraynor 23:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Assuming good faith is working just fine for me. I believe, in good faith, that pre-emptively calling people "liar" is an act of bad faith. Otto4711 04:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. This is not even comparable to the various list of characters from certain franchises because the characters have at least one sentence's worth of description about themselves.  This list in question is about how the characters died and nothing more, which makes it a trivia article.  I don't believe that I would be opposed to a list of characters from the series.  A possible compromise would be to re-title this article to a similar list title and provide actual description of the characters besides how they died.  If this is not possible, I stand by my vote. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 23:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes however a good amount of friday the 13th characters wind up having very little screentime so placing a quick description of them wouldnt be very helpful. Also adding more detail would break rules of WP:LIST as being too exessive. Jamesbuc


 * Merge back into each individual Friday the 13th article if such a list isn't already there. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 00:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Which article? The "film series" article, or the individual film articles?  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 00:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The individual film articles. Since these are horror films, a "List of deaths" section within each such article seems appropriate. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 00:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think a "list of deaths" in the individual articles is appropriate as the information is nothing more than spoiler info, that has nothing to do with the article. I think the list should be turned into List of Friday the 13th characters, and real character informatio be added. I don't even think that needs its own page, because it isn't like each film is populated with tons of people. The films already have a cast section with all these characters. They should just be expanded upon to include character information. We have to remember that Wiki is an encyclopedia first, and death scenes are hardly notable as a whole.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 00:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If you believe that the article should be a character list, then you should !vote to Keep and Move the article to List of characters from the Friday the 13th film series. Otto4711 12:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You're misinterpreting what I say. I don't want to keep this information, the information, as it's listed, is not notable, important, or hard to find (I already provided a link to the list on another site). I think a REAL character list should be created, one that follows other character lists. You keep citing the writing about fiction for minor characters, but that doesn't apply here, because this list isn't a list of minor characters it's a list of EVERY DEATH in the series, whether by a minor or major character. Not the same. A real list of characters would have information that is congruent to a "CAST" section in a film article, more specifically a film article that has reached FA status. It would look like this, this, or this. The difference would be that the "list" would be longer.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 15:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Otto4711. Epbr123 00:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Please read WP:PERNOM. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 00:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge the pertinent parts of the list (linked actors) back to their original films, deleting the rest. Despite their (rather uncivil) belittlementof the genre, another editor has made the point that WP:NOT. That said, some of the info has apparent value, as it has been wikilinked (contrary to List of films by gory death scene, which seems to be rather significantly crufty). Arcayne 02:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fancruft. Not encyclopaedic in nature.--Bryson 02:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Listcruft, fancruft, Crufty the Clown, take your pick. Realkyhick 03:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * My pick would be cruft in any form is not a valid argument for deletion. Otto4711 04:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 *  STRONG KEEP Delete This is a list that is not available anywhere else. As such, it may be very valuable to someone out there who wants to use it as a reference of some sort. Just because you don't find it useful doesn't mean someone else doesn't.--Ng.j 05:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Since this list already exists on a more appropriate fansite, I think it should be deleted.--Ng.j 15:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * This list is available in other places, Here's one copy. Fridaythe13thfilms.com is not only a popular site, but a source for some of these F13 articles. Look what else is on the site, I'm thinking that each film should have a link to this website. If you think "death scenes" are important then link it to the appropriate film's section on "body counts".  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 10:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read WP:USEFUL. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 11:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment {nods} Besides which while the "someone might find it useful" line is endemic to AfD discussions, I really have a hard time imagining who, exactly, would find a list of how precisely some random gumbys got hacked in some slasher flick useful, divorced from the individual movies themselves. I note, weirdly enough, that the individual movie articles don't have this laundry list, and you'd think that's the first place someone wanting this info would look.  RGTraynor 12:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I only found it because of the footer that's on the bottom of most of the movie articles, the template. I never saw it get mentioned in any of the movie articles. I do agree with you that I'd be more likely to look at the movie article rather than an exhaustive list, just pointing out that there's really no reference to this list in the movie articles. Mo0 [ talk ] 16:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and WP:NOT. Chevinki 17:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read WP:PERNOM and WP:JUSTAPOLICY. It's preferred that a more substantial argument be made with deletion discussions per WP:AFD. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 17:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom Makgraf 06:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read WP:PERNOM. Deletion debates are not a voting process, and your vote should be backed with as independent of an argument as possible. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 11:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: WP:PERNOM and WP:JUSTAPOLICY are just elements of the same essay, purely the opinion of a handful of editors with zero weight as either policy or guideline. In point of fact, there is nothing in WP:AFD requiring expansive editor's comments in an AfD.  The degree to which a closing admin pays attention to "Delete per nom" is one thing, but haranguing people to come up with longwinded arguments needs a better reason than your personal preference.  RGTraynor 14:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "Haranguing" is a strong word. I've requested people who have voted both ways to substantiate their claims.  The guide to discussing AfD says, "The debate is not a vote; please make recommendations on the course of action to be taken, sustained by arguments."  It also says, "Do not base your recommendation solely on the information supplied by the nominator," which Makgraf did.  The essay basically expands on what arguments are appropriate and are not appropriate.  Even if we don't abide by it, the user is essentially making this a voting process by saying "Delete per nom."  So yes, per the guideline, arguments should be made.  It has nothing to do with personal preference and everything to do how an AfD should be carried out, to seek a consensus.  Three words' worth of a recommendation does not meet the need for "arguments" to be presented by the editor.  At the end of the section, it even says, "You don't have to make a recommendation on every nomination; consider not participating if you agree with the consensus that has already been formed."  Otherwise, the person's recommendation is merely a throwaway, insubstantial vote. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 16:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep There has been many attempts as far as deleting this page is, the reason it should stay is that it does keep to WP:LIST as it keeps all details short and quick without too much fancrufty detail. Also it makes an easy and simple look up of deaths from one series into an easy to read and consise page. This is much simpler than having to trawl through 11 different pages to find out your infomation. As a third reason is that it contains simple details complete with cast listings that also apply with WP:FILM easily. I am aware of another site (fridaythe13thfilms.com) containing this infomation however unlike this page users must still look through about 11 different pages and another 11 for cast links. It is just a lot more simpler to have them placed in one pageUser:Jamesbuc
 * Comment - Tell me, other than following the guidelines for "List" (which I could do by setting up a "List of movies where people pick their nose" (that would be concise and short)), exactly what is the importance, notability, or even reason for keep the list? Everyone on here that says "keep" is just saying "it fits these guidelines", and the guidelines being how it's formatted. But no one has come up with a reason that rebuts the reason everyone else say they are not notably important, or encyclopedic. 10:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment According to Lists (stand-alone lists), "Lists that are too specific are... a problem. The 'list of one-eyed horse thieves from Montana' will be of little interest to anyone (except the person making the list)." You seem to be saying that "It's useful," which is an argument based on subjectivity, a judgment that should not apply to deletion debates.  Maybe fridaythe13thfilms.com should be advised to reformat their lists so there's a singular list, but just because Wikipedia has that list available does not seem to be the most intact reasoning per the arguments that I've made in my own vote and this comment. —Erik (talk • contrib • review) - 11:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes thats true but considering that the main site is for the singular films mainly I doubt that they will merge all the pages together, secondly there are also links to the actors that people could want but considering the legnth of the series it is easier placing them in various pages (ive had many occourances where somebody's been confused about which film they were actually in). In any case ill repeat what I said again, it IS notable due to the nature of the films and it fully keeps withing WP:LIST guidelines. Jamesbuc
 * (Sorry for this being so long)...Every horror film deals with death. Friday is notable in the fact that its death are rather graphic and they are one of the reason it's panned by critics all the time. As I said before, the "theme" of death is notable, but not a list of every death that occured. You're only listing plot points from a movie, with no real world context in the entire list. Remember, this is an encyclopedia, and being so you have to have real world context. That is why film articles are not supposed to be just "plots" and why "plots" are not supposed to be overly long with minute details about every minor thing (e.g. like the death of a hitch hiker in The Final Chapter). This is a list someone created because they couldn't put every single death into the plot, it's a circumvent of plot guidelines. All the "featured lists" have real world context, that is why the are featured, and the point of every page should be to get to that status. I stated before, I think the "theme of deaths" should be noted (with reliable sources from crew and critics) on the "film series" page, but not a detailed list of every joe schmo in the film, that probably didn't even have any lines, who was killed. People have cited the "minor characters" guideline, but this isn't a list of minor characters, it's a list of deaths for EVERY character, even ones that were not major or minor in the films. To be accepted, you cannot simply say "it meets this requirement" if it fails several others. Would you vote to make the guideline for film plots any length the editor wants? Do you think that film articles should be based solely on the plots, and that we should tell the reader every little thing that happens? That is what this list does. It doesn't even attempt to turn a list into anything encyclopedic. A "theme of death" can be encyclopedic, because the series is well known for it's obligatory death scenes, but where is the value in listing every single death scene? Should we create a list of everyone that wore white after labor day? I'm sure someone wants to know that information, it's taboo.  BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 12:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete for reason given in original nom -- Orange Mike 23:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this article contains only trivia info.Dimts 06:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Unencyclopedic. Wikipedia is not a crappy Geocities page built by a 14 year old. The plot information should be incorporated within the plot summaries of the individual film articles. This sort of stuff is pathetically immature. The JPS talk to me  22:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep noteworthy list of an important plot element. In line with WP:LIST. Unless we decide that the Friday 13th series as such is unencyclopedic, we should keep the list. -- User:Docu
 * Comment to quote janejellyroll: "As an above argument for deletion stated, this list serves no purpose other than to create a quick reference of deaths in a particular series of horror films. However, this particular series of horror films is seminal, very popular, spans over two decades, and has been the focus of scholarly works ("Games of Terror" by Vera Dika is one that comes to mind).  The list itself avoids common pitfalls we've seen on other horror movie death lists (pointless pictures, lengthy plot recapitulations, unnecessarily gory details) and meets the guidelines at WP:LIST.  Would it really be a better solution for readers to have to go to eleven different articles to see, for example, how many people have been killed with a machete in the Friday the 13th series? (Okay, I know some of you can't imagine anybody wanting to know that information ever . . . but anyway)" (from Articles for deletion/List of deaths in the Friday the 13th series). -- User:Docu
 * Wikipedia is not a substitution for watching the film. If they are going from article to article in search of who gets killed and how, then they are looking for a substitution for watching the film. This is why film articles contain more information than just plots and cast list. This is why they contain info about production, releases, critical reception, because articles are not based around the plot or plot points of a film. How many people died of the same death in Part V? I can think of 3 right now, without looking at the page, that died just from eyes being cut out. Gee, let's have an article that lists the same thing over again. This article is the equivalent to have a list of scores for every football game in 2006. The relevance being? Of course, football is about scoring, it's been around for decades, so that means we need a list that tells us how many points a team score in every game of ever season. It's called "prose". You are taking a plot and breaking it down into a scene by scene list, only excluding everything that doesn't involve a death.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  20:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - per Docu's reasoning above. Rklawton 21:27, 4 April 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.