Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Representation of Women in The Big Bang Theory


 * 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. Contact me if anyone wants to userfy and attempt to salvage. Mojo Hand (talk) 01:21, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Representation of Women in The Big Bang Theory

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article reads as an essay, contains a number of questionable sources, including a blog, a college thesis, and a wiki, contains a large amount of quotes, and is not written from a neutral point of view. Although the subject of the article may meet notability requirements, it is so un-encyclopedic now that it should be blown up and stated over or userfied. Hirolovesswords (talk) 14:02, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 14:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 14:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 14:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect but I don't know where. The article is basically a coatrack for two studies, not that these are not reliable studies, but we wouldn't write a whole article around them. Whether the redirect is to Big Bang Theory, or some article about the representation of women in culture, I'm not sure, but at worst, The Big Bang Theory is a target, though it is large and perhaps a bit clunky at the moment (the awards table can be split off, that's a common means to trim down, and the section about all the relationships without any sourcing seems like OR); this criticism of the show for how it depicts female characters should be in the critical reception section there. --M ASEM (t) 15:22, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. It is an essay. Bazinga.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 19:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Just an essay. Doubt redirect would be useful. However the topic itself could have encyclopaedic value and any useful part of that should be transferred to the theme or critical review section of the main article. Cowlibob (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's an essay. We don't do essays. -- Calidum  03:02, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator.-- TMD   Talk Page.  03:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Return to draft space - I do believe that the subject is notable. The problem here is neutrality, which could potentially be solved via editing.  Merging with TBBT is not really viable as that article is very large already, as noted.  Perhaps the best idea would be to re-work this into a larger topic ("critical reception of TBBT") which can go into more depth than the main article, but also cover more points of view than presented here.  Regardless, it seems like somethign could be worked out in draft space to salvage the contribution rather than "blow it up and start over".  Pinging  who accepted this at AfC (and noted it had some problems when doing so). --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete- Just an essay. The topic does not seem notable, and I doubt it can be covered neutrally] even in principle. [[User:Reyk| Reyk YO!  16:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete essay. Bearcat (talk) 09:14, 3 January 2015 (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.