Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swordfish (password)

 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 keep. Woohookitty 12:03, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Swordfish (password)
Delete as a non-notable and vaguely associated culture reference. Peter Isotalo 21:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article needs improvement, particular citing sources. Frankly I wondered whether this material was verifiable. But a quick check shows it's true about its being in the Marx Brothers' Horse Feathers. That film is massively notable and I can well believe that film buffs would recognize references to it even if I wouldn't. The movie "Swordfish" was pretty popular, Terry Pratchett is pretty popular, on the whole I think this is encyclopedic and I wouldn't be surprised if it were expanded. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:21, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, spare me the notability-by-association argumentation. It's a blanket excuse for anything that obviously violates inclusion policy but happens to be popular among editors with ambitions to turn Wikipedia into a barely indiscriminate collection of information. You might as well not have motivated the votes at all. / Peter Isotalo 16:24, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep I agree with dpbsmith. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk)
 * Keep. Sufficiently notable. Jonathunder 00:19, 2005 September 12 (UTC)
 * Keep - I was looking for exactly this information, and here it is.
 * Above vote by by 66.209.88.130. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, this is the kind of eccentric topic that helps distinguish Wikipedia from typical encyclopedias. --Metropolitan90 00:21, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: notable, interesting, and informative. --Smerdis of Tlön 19:54, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. WP does not need an article on every funny cue line! Nabla 23:21, 17 September 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.