Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ripper (television)


 * 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 delete. Petros471 16:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Ripper (television)
Crystal Ball. This is something that was planned and now may or may not happen. Needs to be deleted and redirected to Rupert Giles. It can be re-created if this ever goes into production. Ace of Sevens 08:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete because. Danny Lilithborne 08:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nearly Headless Nick 09:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I think that there is a place on Wikipedia for certain TV series, movies, video games etc. that didn't happen, so long as they're notable (either as a significant spinoff of something as notable as Buffy, or by a particularly notable creative team), and that there's enough interesting information and history to make the article worthwhile. Had that been the case with Ripper, I'd have voted Keep. However, despite looking at one point like it would go ahead, I don't think things ever got far enough along the line (with plotting, potential casting, whatever) for this article to ever be particularly substantial - unlike, say, Buffy the Animated Series, which I feel is a worthwhile article. Note that if this is deleted, there's information in it that it would be worthwhile merging elsewhere - whether in the Giles entry or in Buffy itself - and also that Template:buffyversenav will need to be edited (unless the article redirects to Rupert Giles and a section on Ripper is created there, in which case it should be alright). Seb Patrick 10:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * keep I don't think it sould be deleted as it is still a potential venture and is at least as important as a given book in the timeline is. and as to "either as a significant spinoff of something as notable as Buffy, or by a particularly notable creative team" it would be a significant spinoff if it were to go ahead and mutant enemy are a particularly notable team. In a couple of years after goners and wonda woman there is a good chance that this could still go ahead. I wouldn't delete it untill someone has made a statement that it will not go ahead, so until someone produces that evidence I think the article should stay.--Knavescurvy 13:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Another possible option maybe to create a Buffyverse undeveloped projects page (which could also include Buffy animated, and Spike movie)? I'm unsure whther this would be a better idea than merging the Ripper article with the Rupert Giles article? I shall vote later after some discussion. -- Paxomen 13:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is purely speculative and once it has been confirmed as being a real series, an article about this can be set up. At the moment, it's not worth keeping at all. NP Chilla 13:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * comment - the article doesn't belong on the Rupert Giles page as it is to me more about the buffyverse than the character at the current time it can be seen on the buffyverse chronology timeline as a potential series that occurs after season 5 of angel and the web page clearly states how speculative it is at the moment which is not this year but there is intrest in doing it in a few years. the only other alternative that I would deam acceptable is to create a Buffyverse undeveloped projects page.--Knavescurvy 13:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Slay as above - if this ever did materialise then this could be recreated. Hopefully with some content. Barneyboo (Talk) 13:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * comment I'm sorry that I am bothering you all again but I have just looked at Deletion_policy and as this is not a hoax not misleading and not unverified (everything that the article states is verified) not nonsence or vanity or even poorly written, In fact there isn't an actual problem other than that the article doesn't state how likely it is to happen which as that information is unavailable is not a problem with the article so unless someone actually states a proper reason as in the deletion policy this process is inconcistent. --Knavescurvy 13:37, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. At best, demands WP be a crystal ball and accept that a possible idea someone may still pursue sometime in the future, could become a TV series or something... at worst, fancruft.  Tychocat 16:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge: Ther emight be a place for some of this material in one of the other Buffy/Anthony Head related pages.


 * 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.