Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of flashbacks on Lost


 * 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 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42...delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

List of flashbacks on Lost


Article is unencyclopedic fancruft and does not present information better than List of Lost episodes or individual character pages. -- Wikipedical 05:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * ADDED FLASHBACK SUMMARIES TO ALL EPISODES - WORK IN PROGRESS --SilvaStorm
 * No that won't solve the issue...and that is strange logic seeing as nobody has presented lack of material as an argument. It's the nature of the material, and adding more doesn't make it better...quite the opposite in fact. —Doug Bell talk 07:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, check user pages of yours, mine and Spawn Man - somewhere there they mentioned lack of material! I have added details to every flashback episode. --SilvaStorm
 * No, you're confusing lack of material with uselessness, (from before you added the details in any case anyway...). As I said before, every episode has a flashback, so you may as well see the list of episodes list. Whatever the case, the article is fan cruft & its contents can be seen in any of the episode articles... Spawn Man 03:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, as nominator. --  Wikipedical 05:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- † Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 05:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete listcruft. Information already present in other articles, such as the list of episodes, anyways. -- Ned Scott 05:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Redundant, not in keeping with Wikipedia, etc.  Better suited to lost.wikia -- PKtm 05:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, quickly before it multiplies. —Doug Bell talk 07:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is a really useless list. J I P  | Talk 08:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 08:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. MER-C 08:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete notice for deletion was removed by SilvaStorm and replaced with a Underconstruction label. PremKudva Talk  10:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I restored the AfD notice on the page. Rafy 10:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge to Lost. Flashbacks do not warrant their own article. Please keep Wikipedia's high standard by not creating pages that cover minor issues. --Fred McGarry 10:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Those flashbacks are already covered in the individual episode articles. I don't see why we need a list of them. What would it be used for? = Mgm|(talk) 11:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination... also interesting to note when I asked for some justification for having this article on the talk page yesterday, SilvaStorm blanked my request... guess that meant he/she didn't have any.--Isotope23 14:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, another piece of fancruft, and non-notable, unencyclopedic material. Does not warrant an article on Wikipedia, isn't there a Lostpedia? Ter e nce Ong 15:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Lumaga 15:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --theDemonHog 15:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Lost WIKIA thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Simonkoldyk 19:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete There are multiple flashbacks in every episode of Lost, making this unremarkable. --Canley 20:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nominator. Linuxaurus 21:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete- Unnecessary in my opinion, and as stated above, it's unencyclopedic.-- SU IT  22:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OMG! Delete! - Ummm, the whole show is a flash back. Shouldn't there be an article called "Shows on Lost that actually show present events"? It would be a stub too... ;) As per nom... Spawn Man 23:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * :-) —Doug Bell talk 01:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: redundant information - SigmaEpsilon → &Sigma; &Epsilon; 16:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge to Lost. Just H 17:06, 30 November 2006 (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.