Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NO MA'AM


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  04:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

NO MA'AM
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Strong Delete I think this epitomizes the problem with Wikipedia. It's a collection of useless TV Trivia. I don't see the point in non-notable articles like this.George Pelltier (talk) 02:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Against deletion, we have entire chapters on for instance, every river mentioned in the lord of the rings, pokemon, etc. This Trivia is not worthless. Personally, I see the relevance of this article. It is definitely not a non-noticable article. Taketa (talk) 11:31, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, sadly. MWC is one of my favourite TV shows, but... I spent some time searching and could find no even remotely reliable secondary sources talking about NO MA'AM. Something which every river mentioned in Lord of the Rings has. ;) What useful content is in this article should be added to the main MWC entry. Make it a redirect to Married... with Children. Dendlai (talk) 14:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Purely in-universe plot material with no established coverage by any independent reliable sources. Posthumous redirect is fine. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm tempted to say A7 Speedy (non-notable organization), but I think that might be bending the spirit of the rule.  Powers T 18:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete--trivial since entirely in-universe. Drmies (talk) 18:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm sure there's a Wiki for this kind of thing, but Wikipedia isn't it. JuJube (talk) 05:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Hilarious group within the TV show, but there aren't any references to it outside the MWC universe. If possible, add some abridged information about it to the main MWC article.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 06:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, Wikipedia cannot discriminate against certain topics due to the vagaries of some editors. It's here for a long time, it's being constantly edited, that means it should be here.  #   Ido50  ( talk  to me), at 00:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Um... see WP:EFFORT. Just because a page has been around a while or a lot of people have worked on it, doesn't mean it's suitable for Wikipedia. The question is whether it meets our inclusion guidelines, and this article doesn't. Robofish (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - trivial fictional topic, lacks real-world notability. Robofish (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * KEEP - Stop whining about it! it isn't hurting anyone. i can't even believe there are people who care.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.101.193 (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, it's critical we maintain consistent inclusion criteria, and enforce them, lest we get inundated with unmaintainable minutia. Powers T 02:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, maybe merge and redirect to Al Bundy. The organization was featured in 14 episodes, and is recognized as an important element of the series by the St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture and the Encyclopedia of Television Subjects, Themes and Settings. More significant coverage in reliable sources likely exists in offline sources, as the series was popular mostly before the Internet was. DHowell (talk) 05:02, 21 February 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.