Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Underground trivia


 * 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 of the debate was Keep. Yanksox 17:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

London Underground trivia
I have nominated this article because of the use of the word "trivia", which is defined by wiktionary as insignificant trifles of little importance, especially items of unimportant information. This puts the article in direct conflict with my understanding of the following Wikipedia guidelines:


 * 1) Articles title assumes that the information therin is trivial, violating NPOV
 * 2) If we are to assume that the articles information is indeed trivial then it is violating Imporance.
 * 3) Finally being that a trivia list is inherintly a list of random facts, this article is in violation of What Wikipedia is not.

Some or all of the information in this artile may be good however, it should be integrated into proper places within established articles. For advice on how this may be accomplished you might want to look at: Trivia and User:GK/On adding trivia to the main body of an article. The_stuart 17:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. I created this page to solve a problem - namely, that the headline London Underground article was way, way too big and unstructured. It's a subject about which there are a lot of factoids and bits of information which are interesting but not interesting enough for the already-bloated main page. This page provides somewhere for them to go - otherwise they would just start appearing back on the headline article again, leading to more reversions, more editor effort, and more edit wars as people battle over what's important enough to be on the headline article and what's not. In short, this page is there for a reason! --Mike 18:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Mike. The information on this page is useful to hundreds of people looking for information such as this.  Most articles would have it on the main article, but the London Underground article is far too bloated already.  DJR (Talk) 18:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete per nom. no place in an encyclopedia Caveat lector 19:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's quite different to something like "Tom Cruise trivia" - discussing LU trivia is a common pasttime for Londoners. None of the facts are original research, they are things that people discuss and pass around. It really is in a different category to the other trivia pages marked for deletion. Trious 20:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per User:Mpk et al. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I guess someone out there really hates trivia. Half wikipedia is trivia so need more of a reason than "it's trivia". --MarsRover 04:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Having read the article, IMHO the content is wiorthy of inclusion. The issue is whether it is collected here, where people can find it, or divided among multiple articles according to subject-matter, which will make it difficult to co-ordinate the suble connectivities involved -- SockpuppetSamuelson 07:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep- per mike. Many articles have trivia and some articles have big sections which deserve seperate articles Simply south 11:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - it might be titled 'trivia' but it's far less trivial than dozens of articles about episodes of Star Trek or obscure American public servants. Bretonbanquet 23:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Then it needs a new title--The_stuart 01:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Most articles have a trivia section. Just because this one's is long enough to be moved to a separate page doesn't change that. --Dtcdthingy 04:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Featured article do not.--The_stuart 01:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I have contributed to this article and consider it worthwhile to retain it as a stand-alone page. As has been pointed out, this page does not represent original research but instead acts as a catalogue of facts about London's underground system which are circulated amongst Londoners much as one might circulate jokes or indeed any meme of information.  I'd say this page is already the best record on the Internet of such facts and should hence be retained.  'Trivia' in the title of the page is being used in a far less pejorative sense than "things which are trifling or unimportant", and is instead being used more in the sense of "bite-sized facts".  I think trivia is the best title for the page but perhaps we could work on an alternative title referring to 'facts'.


 * 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.