Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of portrayals of and references to Bill Gates


 * 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. --Core desat 04:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

List of portrayals of and references to Bill Gates

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Just a collection of loosely associated topics, fails WP:NOT Jay32183 05:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. Non-notable cruft. -- bullet proof  3:16 05:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This page does assert notability.-- bullet proof  3:16 05:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I was going to say merge, but this list is long. &larr;BenB4 06:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Actually, the page doesn't assert notability. There can never be multiple, reliable sources acknowledging each of the dot point mentions (only the tv show/song/game itself). So it's an indiscriminate collection of trivia. Spellcast 07:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, Spellcast's points were convincing. – sebi 10:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Bill Gates. --PEAR (talk) 12:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Portrayals of and (especially) references to Bill Gates are too common to be notable. Propaniac 14:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete A list of "references to" Bill Gates (ie every time his name is mentioned on a TV show) is not even trying to be maintainable or encyclopedic. Iain99 15:43, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete list of loosely associated items - These are all extremely trivial mentions too Corpx 16:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:NOT. Otto4711 18:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to a subpage of Talk:Bill Gates, for the reference of future editors who may be able to find some way to re-integrate individual items on this list into the article in chief. - Smerdis of Tlön 18:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.  -- Pax:Vobiscum 21:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Listing every single reference to Bill Gates has no encyclopedic value. Major studies or documentaries should be covered by the main article. Pax:Vobiscum 21:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - per &larr;BenB4. Strongly against deletion, if this goes against it then it at least should be a redirect to preserve the history for future editors to refer to. Mathmo Talk 00:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep It obviously can't be merged back into Bill Gates, who is the 21st Century version of Andrew Carnegie. Gates is, and will continue to be, a pop culture figure of sorts.  This is one of the few "in popular culture" articles (I know, they avoided the IPC phrase... good thinking) that illustrates the conflicting views.  Did anyone else notice how many folks are afraid to mention Gates by name, and end up saying "Will Bates" or "Henry Gates"?  Maybe it's out of fear of Microsoft retribution.  Very few well known figures receive that type of deference.  Mandsford 00:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per [User:Pax:Vobiscum|Pax:Vobiscum]]. This is an "in popular culture" list of indiscriminate information under another name. - fchd 06:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this is a pop culture list and anything that makes Bill Gates a pop culture person should be included in his bio. Carlossuarez46 20:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Bill Gates. We do this with every other 'List of portrayals in popular culture', and there is no compelling reason to do otherwise in this case. Cynical 15:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Several such lists have been deleted altogether recently. Unsourced information shouldn't be merged. Propaniac 21:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge per Cynical --Greatest hits 20:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete listof~1 Fails WP:NOT and is too many characters long for beloved MS-DOS ;-). JPG-GR 04:01, 12 August 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.