Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of running gags (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. Mailer Diablo 20:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

List of running gags
Another case of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Since its first nomination in October 2005 this list is starting to resemble a katamari (sticky ball rolling around) picking up references to every cruft of fiction that's ever employed humour. But after the failure of Articles for deletion/List of fictional military organizations I have my doubts sanity will prevail here either. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  19:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Guidelines for list membership criteria here are too subjective. Violates WP:OR and WP:V. WP:LIST says, "if someone is listed as an X, that person must have been identified as an X by a reliable published source." How do you cite a reliable, published source that identifies something as a running gag? Inclusion on this list is non-verifiable. Scorpiondollprincess 21:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, way too indiscriminate. If anywhere, running gags should only be mentioned on each movie/game/whatever's article. BryanG(talk) 21:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as currently completely unsourced. When someone writes the bestseller Running gags in television and film 1909 to present we'll have an article, but this is absolutely indiscriminate (btw, nice analogy - Katamari it is). Z iggurat 01:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * weak delete is funny but i guess it should be deleted.SNAPE KILLS A FLY HAHAHAH PWNED! 06:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete ridiculous collaboration of nothing in general — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machine Head (talk • contribs)
 * Delete. No one comes looking for this stuff here; if any of this material is relevant, it should be on the pages of the respective TV shows/movies/games etc. -Joshuapaquin 16:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nom and Scorpiondollprincess's reasoning. --Spondoolicks 20:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly Keep: I really, really like it and think it can be really useful, especially for the people who like to research TV series, comics, etc. Ehighkick28c 20:28, 22 July 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.