Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rab - Villains on Buffy the Vampire Slayer

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Redwolf24 04:48, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Villains on Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Unencyclopedic, Buffy-cruft. It's dedicating a whole article on the "villain" aspect of a TV show. It's redundant because it just reiterates information found in a table in the main BtVS slayer and information from the individual villain articles. In addition, there is a bunch of fandom information posing as facts with no references (i.e. "Some fans", "little bad", etc.) Conter 21:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete As so eloquently stated above. --Lomedae 21:29, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep because (1) The nominator didn't even add a tag to the article (I added it for him)- drawing the nomination into question, and (2) As one user remarked on the talk page, while it's redundant at the moment, "That's not to say there's no place for this article, just that it needs expansion to be pertintent. Perhaps more description--the villains objectives, etc.--should be given of the major villains. It might be good to include more of the minor, one episode villains as well." CanadianCaesar 22:08, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Also interesting to note that this nomination represents the user's only edits. CanadianCaesar 22:33, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * What's NOT interesting is this article. Duplicative fancruft, delete. --Calton | Talk 00:37, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. You people are dumb.  This is good stuff.  Only fascists would decide to delete. (vote & comments by user User:172.158.10.66 )
 * Keep. Fight the fascist regime. User:Freedom from Fascists
 * Keep. Destroy the cabal's evil deletion plan. User:Cabal Fighter
 * Keep. Deleting this article grants the cabal the ability to Lorena Bobbit any article. User:Keeper of good things
 * Keep. Look at the fascists.  One of them even commented with Heil VfD.  Fight the fascists now before they delete the whole wikipedia. User:King Pat
 * Keep. Don't let the punk bitches delete this article. Buffy A 05:11, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge into main article. &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2005-08-15 03:04
 * Keep. This is the ULTIMATE Buffy article on Wikipedia. All you delete people are anti-Buffy. Buffy is the BEST show on television and the show deserves dozens of articles about it. You people need to get off your high horse and CHANGE YOUR DELETE VOTES TO KEEP. Otherwise, I will expose all the members of this anti-Buffy cabal to the entire community.  IF YOU DELETE THIS ARTICLE, YOU ONLY DEMONSTRATE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS RUN BY A BUNCH OF FASCISTS.  Ivers2 03:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fan-cruft and repetitive to boot.  I disagree with the fascist name-calling since the information is already in the stubby villain articles at Category:Buffy the Vampire Slayer characters.  Also, in Buffy The Vampire Slayer the villains are already listed there with links to each villain character article.  Sixpence 03:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete but not because it's fancruft (I gave up on killing fancruft when I read Jimbo Wales agree on Wiki is not paper that Wikipedia might as well document every Simpsons episode and character); it should be deleted because it is original research. --Tysto 04:01, 2005 August 15 (UTC)
 * Delete. Crufty, original research.  Heil VfD! Proto t c 10:42, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm a huge Buffy fan. I mean, huge. Like, super-duper, know-the-name-if-every-episode, trekkie fan of it. However I am also a wikipedian and we don't do original research. So, and I say this tearing my human soul into piecies, delete gkhan 10:47, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ohh, and by the way, the big bad for season 2 was not drusilla, it was angelus!!! Stupid, stupid rat creatures gkhan 10:49, August 15, 2005 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. The core of the article is essentially a summary of one aspect of the show, which could be kept, because many articles about fiction include a summary. However, beyond this core, is much that is interpretation, and the author's claims about what most fans feel.  If all of the questionable material is removed, there isn't a lot that can't be found elsewhere.  Regardless, I agree with gkhan: There is no way that Dru is the big bad of season 2; it's clearly Angelus. ManoaChild 12:48, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, now I've got fancruft all over me. Nandesuka 13:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Improve or merge The concept of the article isn't bad, but its current execution is extremely poor. Caerwine 18:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect one direction or the other is fine by me. Kim Bruning 01:23, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unneeded cruft, bad article, etc., etc., etc.   ral  315  01:24, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I worked on this article recently, but I realize that the encyclopedic potential for this to equal a featured article is very little.  Also, I couldn't find any authoritative sources for some of the article's claims, therefore the "original research" argument is valid.  For example, no authoritative source states The First's morphing in "Lessons" were suppose to be big bads or just villains from past seasons.  In addition, it looks like this focus on the Buffy villain is spawning more duplicates such as big bad.  At best a merge into the main Buffy article, but it's already there under the "Characters" section so I vote delete. ! ! ! 01:42, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * DoublePlusStrong Keep - Even if the content is poor, poor content is not a valid reason for deleting an article. We should be working to improve it, rather than simply removing something we don't want to take the time to work on.  All these votes for the deletion of a page whose namespace at least has some potential to it, almost make me ashamed to call myself a Wikipedian.  This is inexcusible. --Corvun 14:32, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, we all know this. We don't want it deleted because the content is bad, we want it deleted because it is original research, and it if you removed the original research what would be left is, well, basically a list of the villains. That article would be quite useless, as it would be a complete duplicate of Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer and the villain pages. Please read WP:NOR gkhan 08:41, August 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Duplicative fancruft filled with original research. Shard 04:23, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Combine and Redirect. The "original research" notion seems pretty weak.  Anybody who has watched this show and thought about it should see that it acurately tells what happens with villains on buffy the vampire slayer. Here's the primary source for the claims made in the article: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Seasons One through Seven. If that's not source enough, I cite TV guide.  If that's not enough, I'll go find one of the dozen books on on Buffy and cite that.  They all agree that what this article says is acurate.  Anyone who has thought about the show can verify that most of the claims in this article are acurate, and can correct them where they are astray. No wild or controversial interpretations are offered in this article. And note this from the OR page: "[R]esearch that consists of collecting and organizing information from existing primary and/or secondary sources is strongly encouraged. In fact, all articles on Wikipedia should be based on information collected from primary and secondary sources. This is not "original research," it is "source-based research," and it is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia." This article is not creating a primary source, it is reporting the content of a primary source. A friend of mine has a slogan: "If you want to know about an obscure Roman emperor, go to encyclopedia britanica for all I care. If you want to know about a Sith Lord, go to Wikipedia."   Wikipedia is reliably a very good source of information about our evolving popular culture, probably the best on the net, probably the best in there is.  Wikipedia should be proud of this rather than trying to evolve into a stuffy attempt to be Encyclopedia Britanica. Course, I'm the one who wrote most of this article... User:Philosofool 13:55 PDT 21 August 2005
 * Delete. I agree with most of the above reasons - fancruft, duplicitive, original research, etc...  Pusher 06:40, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This seems milder than the Ashlee Simpson fancruft, but it is still fancruft nonetheless.  The characters section in the main Buffy article and all the individual villain articles in the Buffy category is already enough. Quop 06:56, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment User:Buffy A has blanked this page and submitted it for speedy deletion, twice. Please monitor this page for vandalism. ManoaChild 07:18, 22 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge. While crufty, also of interest. Merging with the main article would suffice. gerryk 13:43, 23 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.