Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Special Operations Executive in popular culture


 * 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. ✗ plicit  12:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Special Operations Executive in popular culture

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This articles as the same problems as the recently deleted Articles for deletion/United States Navy SEALs in popular culture, Articles for deletion/Delta Force in popular culture Articles for deletion/Defense Intelligence Agency in popular culture and like. Mainly: "mostly unreferenced TVtropic listcruft." Like them, it fails numerous policies, guidelines and like: as an 'in popular culture' article, WP:IPC and MOS:POPCULT/TRIVIA, as a list, WP:NLIST and WP:SALAT, as a potential topic, WP:GNG and  WP:INDISCRIMINATE, due to lack of references, WP:OR and WP:V. This just more of the mostly unreferenced trivia (in fact, this is worse than many similar lists, as it lists entries without even explaining their relevance, ex. "Charlotte Gray, (2001). Based on a novel by Sebastian Faulks."). The tiny amount of prose content is in the lead is irrelevant. This type of content is not encyclopedic - it's pure OR that belongs at https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/CIA. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Military, Popular culture,  and United Kingdom. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - Like the other recently deleted articles on defense and military related departments in popular culture noted in the nomination, this is nothing but a list of non-notable trivia. There is no actual discussion of the overall topic.  Even the one seemingly decent source in the lead is not actually on the topic, being instead on the real world SOE with that single quoted sentence (which itself is just an aside) being the only thing remotely mentioning popular culture. Rorshacma (talk) 00:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. There aren't reliable independent sources to verify the WP:NOTABILITY of this topic. This is pure WP:OR, which says that a topic without reliable independent sources should not have an article about it. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:22, 2 June 2022 (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.