Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes


 * 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. As far as I can tell, not a single keep vote was based in policy...and the ones that quote WP:EPISODE failed to give evidence for how these lists met it. Smashvilletalk 14:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Overturned to no consensus at Deletion review/Log/2009 June 10. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 17:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I hesitated at first to nominate this page for deletion, because most shows seem to have a list of episodes page. I think this kind of list is a little different, because it isn't a plot summary like other lists of (show) episodes. If O'Brien is as successful as Leno or Carson, this list could end up being in the thousands of episodes. These kinds of shows have far more episodes per year, than sitcoms, comedies, etc.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 07:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Adding
 * I am adding the following, for the same reason:
 * UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Bundled AfD Nikmat (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC) Delete All A list of things, none of which are individually notable in themselves, is a perfect example of a non-encyclopedic list. Both lists are also (currently) an exact duplication of NBC website pages, and so also raise potential copyright issues. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC) Strong delete Even if there's a new article per year, I think it's a bit much. I dont understand wikipedia policy, I admit, but there's likely going to be hundred of episodes, per year. Even that will make it a pretty long and tedius list. --Evildevil (talk) 18:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete all Episode lists can be useful, but for a talk show it'd be very hard to verify. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. So far, only one episode has aired, hardly enough for a list. More episodes are out, and this mass deletion is getting out of hand.SPNic (talk) 18:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Clearly notable. We could alternatively have an article on each episode. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:34, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * How? What would the articles on each episode say? The jokes he told? What the guest stars said?  C T J F 8 3 Talk 20:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - I doubt anyone is going to maintain it, but you could include production and reception info, like other shows. I would almost be better to do an article for the first episode, and then don't do articles for ones after that unless they attract a lot of media coverage. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 20:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Production and reception info would go in an article of a specific episode, not on this list.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 21:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep for both - These are clearly notable; also, saying that only one episode has aired and that there is not enough for a list is a poor reason; the show premiered last night and we all well know there will be more episodes for an expansion. Saying that these are just a list of things - none of which are individually notable in themselves - is also a poor excuse. How are these non-encyclopedic lists? Bottomline, I see absolutely no reason why these should be deleted. The list for Late Night with Jimmy Fallon has recieved good attention (as will the list for The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien) and has taken a long time to put together. Let me ask you this - are we likely to really remember the guests/musical/entertainment guests a long time from now? Probably or most likely not. I see both of these lists as a good source of information - both for the casual viewers and average person to the biggest of fans.  Cartoon Boy talk 4:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the reason we don't have a List of the Tonight Show with Jay Leno episodes is that there are 3,775 episodes, which would create a HUGE article. Besides guests, what is unique about each show that it requires an episode list? This list is different from other shows as there is no plot line to write about, only jokes and guests. If this is kept, whats next: List of Oprah episodes? Hey guesz wat guyz, Oprah gave away sum carz!!!1!1 (yeah, I'm pushing WP:WAX, but it's a good example). WP:SALAT could be applied as well since it is such a broad topic. I don't think Conan is going anywhere soon so this list would get massively huge QUICKLY! Just kill it now while it is still small... Tavix | Talk  02:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * -- Wait a minute, slow down. What is the matter with having a huge article? And also, and I seriously ask you all this, who says that The Oprah Winfrey Show will have an episode list, etc, etc. Who says we have to give every televsion show an episode list? Where is that written in the fine print? Seriously, now, -- "Oprah gave away some cars" -- that's signifigant information how? We don't have to list notes dealing with the littlest details; only signifigant notes (ex: 100th episode, First guest to come back, Andy Ritcher leaves the show). I see that if someone says "Kill it now while it is still small...", that is basically a death sentence for the article. That is simply not fair. The last time I saw someone say that was on a category I created when I first came here -- the first category I wrote, when I clearly had no idea what was "acceptable" and what wasn't -- it was deleted strait away. Now, what I created not valuable to the site in any way, but this is clearly different in my opinion.  I ask you all to give this time. Don't shoot the apple off the tree if it hasn't ripened yet.  Cartoon Boy talk 10:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait! How is Oprah giving away cars any less significant than who is on the Tonight Show? It is all trivial cruft. This list will get way out of hand when there are hundreds and thousands of guest stars on the tonight show.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 07:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep for both - I agree completely with Cartoon Boy. These are clearly noteable. We don't have to list notes for every little detail; and also when I read that we should kill it now before it spreads, it strikes me as being totally immature and disrespectful to the originator of said articles. How would you like reading that on a deletion disscussion for your thread? Give these articles some time; people may find them useful in some way. I see this as all about politics in a way, and that is just a shame.  And I just realized something. The episode list for The Simpsons doesn't contain any plot summaries, and lists 441 episodes as of now. Are you saying that because a list doesn't contain plot summaries then it should be deleted? That's the vibe I'm getting, and come on, now, that list is not that dissimalar from these lists. One more thing, there is a list of episodes for Late Night with Conan O'Brien - List of Late Night with Conan O'Brien episodes - that has been here for a while now, and no one has ever given a second thought about that article or its notability.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.186.155 (talk) 03:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Information about guests and show notes will be of interest to fans of the show. I don't foresee any problem with handling the large number of episodes that will eventuate. Barrylb (talk) 06:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you going on what is of interest to fans, or what is notable for an encyclopedia???  C T J F 8 3 Talk 07:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep people say that there isn't a List of Tonight Show with Jay Leno episodes, but I think that may be mainly down the fact we don't have a full list of those episodes, I see no real reason why we should delete this list. Afkatk (talk) 17:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - There is no reason to delete. These lists are perfectly compatible with Wikipedia guidelines. Rlendog (talk) 18:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Which guidelines are you talking about? Got any links? Tavix | Talk  19:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Which guidelines do you think it violates? I haven't found any. It would be silly to just link to all Wikipedia guidelines. Rlendog (talk) 19:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:SALAT and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Your turn. Tavix | Talk  19:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This list does not violate WP:SALAT, since the scope is approproate - neither too broad nor too narrow. WP:SALAT does not place limitation on the number of specific items within a list, and indeed Wikipedia has lists much longer than this will likely ever get (since it will likely get split by year or some other appropriate category once it gets very long, assuming it ever does).  This list is not a directory, so it does not violate WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Rlendog (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I don't see how this is much worse than, for example, the Daily Show and Colbert Report lists of episodes. Sure, it might not be as detailed but I believe it will get better. Give it some time? amisnaru (talk) 20:08, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:INDISCRIMINATE.  This belongs on a fan page, not Wiki.  Please refer to this AFD: Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Guests_on_Late_Night_with_Conan_O%27Brien_(2nd_nomination) --Madchester (talk) 00:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I see no reason why this should be restricted to a fan page. You provide no other reason as to why this shouldn't be on the site. You also refered to a deleted page that dealt with guests only. A full list of episodes (numbered, dated, guests/musical/entertainment guests, notes) is something else entirely. I seriously believe that both lists should remain on this site. - Cartoon Boy talk 9:17, June 4 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but have you seen the article you're talking about? IT IS A GUEST LIST! Also, you said that he provided no other reason for deletion, but he mentioned WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Tavix | Talk  03:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Strong Delete for both. This has the potential to be an extremely bloated article. 5 episodes per week and probably 40 weeks a year of episodes. No, this is useless fan fluff. I'm a fan of this show but I don't see any reason to keep this going. What use would the information be? Do people need to know who Conan's guest was on a certain date? Create a Conan O'Brien Wiki fan page and put this on there. This page is just more busy work for fans. It would also set a bad precedent for creating other pages like this for David Letterman, Jimmy Kimmell and others. I don't see the value.George Pelltier (talk) 03:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete without evidence of reliable, independent, secondary sources. I'm unconcerned about the article's potential size or cruftiness of content, but whether or not it can be backed up by reliable secondary sources.  Currently, the article has none, and previously it was only supported by a single primary source.  —   pd_THOR  undefined | 03:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep -- If there is List of The Colbert Report episodes (a show with 5 episodes a week, just like Tonight, and has been running for years) with links to individual years, why not have one for the Tonight Show? This article can be finished once 2009 concludes and be titled List of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes (2009) and beginning in January we can have a new article called List of The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes (2010) '' conman33 (. . .talk)  05:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That should probably be added to just because we have one article doesn't mean we need this article.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 16:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The Colbert 2009 article is out of date anyway. Frankly, I'm of the opinion that those articles shouldn't be here, but I dont know policy enough to really honestly comment on them. --Evildevil (talk) 22:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Per WP:EPISODE (which covers TV episode (list) notability), A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The problem with this article is the lack of third-party reliable sources to verify the notability of individual episodes.  Everything is coming straight from the horse's mouth - i.e., the show's official site.


 * We have similar episode lists for shows like Heroes, The Simpons and Saturday Night Live, because they actually have independent coverage of each episode. The likes of Entertainment Weekly and TV Guide regularly post reviews, recaps, and previews for specific episodes.  This isn't the case for talk show episodes.  There may be occasional coverage when there's a special guest (like Obama on Leno) or event (the recent Tonight Show relaunch), but otherwise, there's no significant episodic coverage of talks shows.  To put it in historic perspective, I can find a reliably sourced, third-party review/recap of any episode of SNL aired during this television season or even the past five years.  On the other hand, I doubt this is possible for each and every episode of the Tonight Show aired this year, let alone years ago. --Madchester (talk) 18:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Per WP:EPISODE, "It is important to bear this in mind when creating articles, and it is likely that each individual episode of a television series will not be notable on its own, simply because there are not enough secondary sources available. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) explains further:


 * "When an article is created, the subject's real-world notability should be established according to the general notability guideline by including independent reliable secondary sources — this will also ensure that there is enough source material for the article to be comprehensive and factually accurate.


 * "While each episode on its own may not qualify for an article, it is quite likely that sources can be found to support a series or season page, where all the episodes in one season (or series) are presented on one page. (See examples listed below). Such pages must still be notable, and contain out-of-universe context, and not merely be a list of episode titles or cast and crew: Wikipedia is not a directory."


 * Just because the individual episodes are not notable (and thus do not and should not have an individual article) does not mean that the list of episodes is not notable. Rlendog (talk) 18:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. This year, only three episodes of The Tonight Show have merited extensive, independent coverage outside of NBC - the Obama episode, Leno's finale and Conan's relaunch.  Independent coverage for three episodes out of some 150-250+ episodes over the year does not meet WP:EPISODE's notabilty guidelines for an episode list.  I can't choose an episode (let alone several episodes) at random and expect to find reliable, third-party reviews or recaps of that evening's sketches or monologue.
 * Also note that the guideline stresses that episodes lists should not merely be a list of episode titles or cast and crew: Wikipedia is not a directory. That's all the article is right now - a list of episodes, with the guests (aka cast) that appeared that night.  Details about that episode's sketches, jokes, monologue, etc. are scant at best without any third-party references about them. --Madchester (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - It does not matter how many episodes meet notability on their own. Even if none did it would not necessarily mean the list is non-notable.  As long as the list of episodes as a whole has sufficient coverage (e.g., TV Guide), it merits inclusion per notability.  I am also not sure I would agree that the guest list is necessarily the same thing as the "cast".  The guest list for a show of  this sort changes each epsiode and is highly relevant, as opposed to a cast that is largely static. Rlendog (talk) 21:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep all; consistent with treatment of other TV shows, and Wikipedia is not running out of paper. JJL (talk) 01:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The nominator does not give a valid reason for deletion. Drawn Some (talk) 02:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. While there is a valid concern that this could lead to List of NBC Nightly News Episodes, it's not quite the same. Reliable sources are available to source each episode.  At a bare minimum, a number of newspapers publish a daily feature saying who the guests will be on the talk shows of the day (and the musical entertainment), see  .  On this basis, all of the information in the list as of now can be sourced with independent, reliable sources. Cool3 (talk) 04:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. The problem is that those "bare minimum" sources are TV listings at best. Per WP:EPISODE, episode lists should be more than said listings of the original air date and cast details (i.e., WP:NOT).  There still aren't any reliable, independent sources providing episodic coverage of each show's content (jokes, sketches, monologue, interview, etc.)
 * Putting it another way, if I missed last weekend's episode of SNL, I can find details of the guest (and musical guest) on any news site. On top of that I can also find a full recap/review of the sketches and musical performances on EW, the Huffington Post, TV Guide, etc.  If I miss an episode of Conan from last week, I can look up said TV listings to see who was on the show, but I'd be hard pressed to find third-party review of the night's interviews or gags.  This article needs independent sources that exceed the "bare minimum" details required of television episode lists.   --Madchester (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, there is more out there than the bare minimum (at least for now). Given that the show is so new, it's hard to evaluate what's out there, but for the first several episodes, I've been seeing a lot of coverage.  Just take a look at [more than 6000 google news hits for stories published in the last day.  Given this, the best I can offer you is a comment on Letterman.  I can find sources describing (in more than a directory fashion) most episodes.  For just this Wednesday, which I assume was fairly average, I find:     and many more.  It's an assumption, but I think it's a fair one, that the same will be true for Conan (and certainly all episodes thus far are well-documented). [[User:Cool3|Cool3]] (talk) 05:20, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. As I mentioned above, there has been a lot of independent coverage of Conan's premiere. Enough to satisfy its own article.  But outside of that one episode, there's a precipitous drop in such sources reviewing each episode's content.  Your sources above would show weak support an argument for having a List of Late Show episodes, but that's not the purpose of this AFD.
 * We need regular Tonight Show episode reviews like this: . Once all the post-premiere hoopla dies down, will there be sufficient independent coverage to exceed said bare minimum requirements of WP:EPISODE?  Because this writer for the NJ Ledger has stopped reviewing the show after two episodes. --Madchester (talk) 05:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * To support a separate article for each episode, we would need considerably more coverage than exists (other than perhaps the premiere), as you suggest. But to support an article listing the episodes, the coverage available is more than adequate. Rlendog (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. Why not add List of The Daily Show guests as well? Or at least the lists by year. They're even less detailed than the Colbert Report list that is added. I'd do it myself but I lack the courage/know-how. -amisnaru (talk) 08:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The nominator does not give a valid reason for deletion. Also it is consistent with treatment of other TV shows, and Wikipedia is not running out of paper. WAS 4.250 (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Last time I checked, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. Therefore you fail. Also, check out the second paragraph in WP:PAPER. There's your second fail. Tavix | Talk  19:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't fail any of the five pillars, so is fine per the 2nd paragraph of WP:PAPER. Rlendog (talk) 21:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Read the first part: NOT A FREE PASS FOR INCLUSION. That mean's don't use it is AfD's perhaps? The second part mentions the 5 pillars but not only those, it also says other policies and guidelines as well. Tavix | Talk  22:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * And it meets all the relevant policies and guidelines, as discussed in many of the Keep responses. Rlendog (talk) 15:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep all per WP:EPISODE as this is how we treat other prominent shows. It passes other necessary guidelines and there's only so many different ways one can dance around WP:IDONTLIKEIT to make it seem like one is bringing up a legit deletion rationale. Vodello (talk) 22:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a talk show, not a dramatic program with "episodes." A magnet for original research. Most talk show airings. whether the Tonite Show starring Steve Allen, Jack Paar, Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, or the latest incarnation have nothing but TV Guide listings of who is supposed to appear, and no reviews or book or magazine discussions with in depth coverage. Wikipedia is not a directory, and talk show episodes are not inherently notable, nor is a list of the episodes encyclopedic. Let's delete this and head off "List of Today Show episodes" June 6, 1955: Chimp J. Fred Muggs pooped on host Dave Garroway's desk." (added)Also, this is a mere directory listing, violating WP:NOT. Edison (talk) 04:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Absolutely no reason to delete a sourced list of episodes that falls well into Wikipedia's guidelines. I also think it is idiotic that the List of The Colbert Report episodes (2009) is listed here, but not List of The Colbert Report episodes (2008), List of The Colbert Report episodes (2007), etc. These are concise lists that are not unwieldy. True, there may not be episodes per se, but that's why we only have lists of them and not individual articles for each. Reywas92 Talk  00:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Do you understand that "sourced" usually means that multiple sources which are not only reliable but independent have coverage? This list is "sourced" only to the network which produces the show. Edison (talk) 03:44, 8 June 2009 (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.