Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recap episode (Air episode)


 * 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. Jaranda wat's sup 00:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Recap episode (Air episode)
Delete, While there is still some debate on this TV show, whether or not to keep individual episode articles, I would think this one could safely be deleted. It's a recap episode with no new animation/footage/etc. In other words, there's nothing more to say about it, other than it was a recap episode, which can easily be done on List of Air episodes. Ned Scott 06:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I could understand some keep votes here, but honestly, there are 13 words in this article (excluding the table), it does really satisfy my need for information. tmopkisn tlka 06:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am slowly improving the air episode articles. Thats the unfinished version. -- Cat out 10:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, the air episode series is under developement. I haven't had the time to complete the air episode series. This afd nomination should be held after I write that article. -- Cat out 10:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * See Breeze (Air episode). That will be the length of this episode (although possibly more). when I am done with it. I am currently on vacation with no access to Air DVDs of mine.
 * Air has a very complex story, the recap episode will allow me to summarise the important points of the entier plot and explain inter-episode referances, how does one seemingly insignificant event in a previous episode affect the rest significantly. Stuff like:
 * why is that 'stupid' crow finding yukitos puppet have any significance?
 * what is the "magical feather" and how does relate to Kano, Michiru and Kanna?
 * Why does Misuzu's sudden crying in Wing has any significance? (reasons are revealed much later as this is a result of a 1000 year curse)
 * -- Cat out 10:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment shouldn't those details go on Air (TV series)? This is an article about a recap episode, not a recap article. -- Ned Scott 10:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No. Air TV series should be mostly talking about the production of the show etc. At least thats what I had in mind. the plot is too complex and long to fit in Air (TV) and leave room for production related suff. Excel Saga has almost no referance to the plot for instance (and its a good article). Articles should be kept at sizes smaller than 32kb if possible as there are unfortunute people stuck with 56k throughout the planet. Excel without a plot is 38 kilobytes. -- Cat out 10:57, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, but I disagree. One, I disagree with your logic of article structure, and two, I disagree with Air having a complex plot.  It was a tear-jerker, sure, but not hard to understand.  But that's besides the point. Using a an article about a recap episode to talk about over-all plot elements is quite inappropriate.  If it is too big for the main article then something like Plot Summary of Air should be made, like how is done with Eureka Seven and Plot Summary of Eureka Seven (anime). In fact, I'd favor that type of format over individual episode articles, or maybe even merging articles that share the same sub-plot arc, like eps 2,3,4 and then 5,6 and such. Again, I'm getting off topic, but you get my point about this article. Also, some of what you suggested sounds like WP:OR. -- Ned Scott 11:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Plot Summary of Air, recap episode no real diference. A recap episode is a plot summary by definition. There is no original research issues when relating Misuzus condition to Kanna, is there? Excel has a basic plot. The only "real" plot is a world domination attempt, but no serious effort is made to that end throughout the series. Air on the other hand has a complex plot. All episodes are related to a degree. Even the Kano and Minagi arcs that kinda dont fit in like the rest (as they are supposed to be seperate endings for the game I believe) actualy relate to Kanna. There is a lot of referances back and forth which in my view should be covered (and the recap episode does a decent job covering this) -- Cat out 11:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no solid plan on how to write the recap article. I wasn't geneticaly engineered with the recap episode engraved to my genes. I first have to rewatch it. If you have suggestions in improving the recap episode, feel free to do so in the articles talk page. If after the improvement drive there is a posibily to merge the article or move it elsewhere, that posibility can be investigated then. This nom is premature. -- Cat out 11:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the nomination stands. A recap episode does summarize the plot, but an article about a recap episode is not about the plot, it's about the episode. -- Ned Scott 11:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The nomination should be made after the articles improvement. The recap episode covers the most important issues. The episode is nothing but a plot summary as you point out and an article about such an episode by definition is a summary of the plot... -- Cat out 11:32, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * We have shorther articles about movies that will hit the theaters in several years as we do not know when the production will be complete. Star Trek XI is one such example. It is not deleted because it has a real potential to grow even though it only has rumors atm.. -- Cat out 11:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, It's kinda a gray area, as a page about an episode shoudl be about the episode, and a recap episode recaps the series to date, but if you're just going to turn it into a plot summary page, it should go into the main series page. Also, if you want to prove that the article has value, you better hurry up and write it. --PresN 21:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am exploring many possibilities since the deletion rationale is that recap episode itself isnt worthy of an article. I disagree with that assesment but am open to suggestions. I have no solid agenda atm on how precisely ı will do the recap episode. -- Cat out 09:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions.   -- TheFarix (Talk) 22:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per concensus. Editors on wikipedia should generally be given time to flesh out articles that they write. "Generally" is the key.  Some types of articles which have tendencies to be trivial in nature (i.e. television episodes) should be developed in a way that conforms to concensus guidelines and policies created for those subject areas.  The general concensus for these has been: 1) Create the article for the main series. 2) When and if section of that article overwhelms the main article, that section should be split into a new article and summarize section on main page. 3) When and if individual entities of a section in the secondary page become too large, split into a third article.   I know the editor who created the article disagrees with these guidlines and policies.  However, because those guidelines were based on concensus decisions and I find them to be very reasonable and quite useful to quality control at the project... my suggestion is to delete. Most of the current air episode articles are this type of one sentence article. Even the example of a "completed" episode page is very short and could easily merged into the list of air episodes.   --Kunzite 01:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not disagree with guidelines/policies (just merely ignoring them as per "ignore all rules policy"), and I do not believe you know me (nor would that be relevant). Multiply the size of Breeze with 15 (we have 15 epidoes) and your number will easily exeed 32kb warranting this kind of seperation. I need to be given time to write the articles. People had been complaining ever since I created the stup pages which I intend to expand. See: Talk:Town (Air episode) -- Cat out 08:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Your math is wrong. The Breeze episode is 1.8kb.  There are 15 Episodes. That makes 27kb, not 32.
 * Secondly, the size argument is invalid. WP:SIZE states that the strict 32kb rule may be ignored for such things as lists.    Thus, if that is your sole reason for creating seperate articles, I will happily go on a merging binge this weekend, just for you.   Even if you choose to ignore another concensus policy, there are other ways to create lists of episodes with these extradionarily short plot summaries on wikipedia.  The list could be divided into episodes arcs, or in half, or thirds.  I find episode lists that concatenated on one page far easier to read, edit, keep track of vandalism, and more succinct than articles spread over a myriad of pages.
 * You stated that the above referenced episode as an example of an expanded article. If 1.8kb (with some chunky template code) is the intended size of this set of articles, then I say they all need to be merged no matter how much time you're given to expand.
 * Finally, per the comment of my talk page, I am not making personal comments about you, I am making comments about the quality of your work of wikipedia. I feel that a poor choice was made in creating this and its sibling articles when a handful of articles would suffice. --Kunzite 02:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete How can a recap episode have any encyclopedic value? It adds nothing to the anime itself, let alone here. There was no new scenes, except the "next episode" preview (which is non-nontable), just a mash up of scenes from the series, and that offers no new interpretation or suggestions of anything that hasn't been brought up from the series. If there is any, then it's original research. _dk 09:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Quoting something from the episode is not original research. How can any episode article not have encyclopedic value? Recap episode made many inter episode referances which were not all that clear otherwise for instance. -- Cat out 09:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you just quote it, then it's just a plot summary (and thus does not deserve its own article). If you add your own explanation on how the sequencing of the scenes makes the theme clear, then it's original research. _dk 09:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry for bothering to respond to you. -- Cat out 16:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It's okay man. Have a cup of tea. _dk 05:32, 15 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.