Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fiction that builds the fourth wall


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 00:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

List of fiction that builds the fourth wall

 * — (View AfD)

Poorly-defined list article (i.e. what exactly is meant by the term "building" the fourth wall?) with potential original research. Most of the examples can already be described in more clearly-defined articles such as List of fiction that breaks the fourth wall, metafiction, etc. Stratadrake 19:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * My own vote is, of course, a delete. When I think about it, the fourth wall is an inherent characteristic of any and all fiction; it's impossible to "build" the fourth wall per sé because the fourth wall is already there; it can only be respected, or broken.  And using a fictional fourth wall as a plot element does not actually constitute breaking the fourth wall, but metafiction instead.  --Stratadrake 19:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete this. Breaking the fourth wall is a known dramatic concept, building it is not and I would challenge you to find reliable sources for either the concept or the inclusion of any given entry. Guy (Help!) 19:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I am familiar with the term, and even I find this confusing... -WarthogDemon 20:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Is this actually an established term in literary analysis or critisism?  As the list stands, it just appears to mean "List of fiction with an explicit narrator", which would seem to include all the Sherlock Holmes books (purportedly written by Dr Watson), "The Lord of the Rings" (purportedly written by Frodo), etc etc. Without a definition that doesn't include 95% of all fiction, this list is unmaintainable. Tevildo 20:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Confused OR which doesn't seem to understand original "breaking the fourth wall" even... Maus, while it uses a cartoon anthropomorphic device, is not fiction. Bwithh 20:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * How ironic. Dramatically so, in fact... Guy (Help!) 21:17, 31 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as WP:OR. No, this not an established critical concept. I think it means more than an explicit narrator, but at present it's barely more than things made up at the student union one day between Comp. Lit. classes. I think metafiction is a better overall concept for the stuff listed. --Dhartung | Talk 21:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * comment doesn't all fiction that doesn't explicitly break the fourth wall build it? The criterion doesn't seem well-defined, but I'm not sure that with a better criteria this wouldn't be a useful, viable list. Wintermut3 02:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * comment It is not an acceptable reason for deletion to say that one has never heard of it. No one of us is an encyclopedia. DGG 08:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but it tends to imply that verifiability is lacking, and besides -- that isn't the only reason for its AFD nomination. See JzG and Dhartung's statements.  --Stratadrake 14:01, 2 January 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.