Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

TV Episodes Considered The Greatest of All Time

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I don't see how this article can be improved to remove its almost total reliance on original research. It's not encyclopedic as it stands and I don't believe it can be made so. Maccy69 (talk) 01:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is simply no encyclopedic way to approach this article.  Even with sources, this article could potentially be subject to POV.  Much of the content in this article should be merged into the appropriate episode's article. --khfan93 02:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: we also have Films considered the greatest ever, which seems to have suffered similar problems, yet survived an AFD nearly four years ago. I'd think that that article might want to be put up for AFD as well; although it is not nearly as bad as this one, it is rather similar.  But I am not going to nominate it myself, because I do not feel that strongly about that article at this point. --khfan93 02:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - It would be impossible to say what episodes should be on the list, and to assume that TV Guide's "Best Episodes" is over equivalent status to Entertainment Weekly's "Best Episodes" would be like comparing apples to oranges. Their both fruit, but they taste different. Also, this page seems to be primarily a listing of TV Guide's favorite episodes of all time, so it's hardly fitting of the title "Episodes Considered the Best Ever" - unless you put "....by TV Guide".   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  02:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong delete as otheres have noted, it is nearly impossible to approach such a topic in a neutral, encyclopedic way, and it appears to primarily be based on the creators view and WP:OR attempt and bringing together various unrelated, uncomparable lists. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 02:40, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 *  Strong delete Axe this list. Original research, not encyclopedic at all, support merging some content to each episode's article (if there is one). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:00, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - it's original research, all right, but that can be fixed. Surely the 'best TV episodes ever' is something that has been written about in the lay press as well as the trade press. - Richard Cavell (talk) 03:53, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Whose list becomes the "ultimate" list? Is TV Guide's list better than anyone else's? What about The New York Post, or Entertainment Weekly, or Fangoria (if we're talking about horror related TV shows). It's too subjective. Any one list could contradict another, and we're not here to just repeat everyone's list on one page (that would fall under WP:INDISCRIMINATE). This is something best reserved for individual articles to have it pointed out that they made so-n-so's "best episodes" list.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  04:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The fact that it's subjective doesn't stop us from having an article on it. Compare Films considered the greatest ever. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The fact that it's subjective makes the title of the article almost impossible to be accurate. You'd never be able to accurately reflect "The Best Episodes", because everyone's list would be different. You cannot apply equal weight to all lists either. I do compare it to the other article, and the other article suffers from the same problem and should probably be deleted as well. Just because something can be sourced doesn't necessarily make it notable, or noteworthy enough to have its own article.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  04:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The difference is that, unlike with film, lists of TV episodes are incredibly subjective, and given to enormous amounts of variance. This can be contrasted with film. It can be easily argued that if you were to ask 50 film critics to name the 10 greats films of all time, Citizen Kane would appear on almost 50 of those lists. Citizen Kane is one example of a film that is very, very widely considered the "greatest of all time." But I see no evidence to suggest the existence of similarly broad critical consensus regarding individual episodes of television. Although I wish such consensus existed, because it'd be very fun to have an article on this topic! ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  19:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  --  N / A  0  04:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no objective inclusion criteria here. This might be OK as a category, but to put these together in one article is problematic, as the !voters above have observed. Jclemens (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Films considered the greatest ever makes a very credible effort to present a wide-ranging survey of respectable film polls in a cohesive manner. This article is nothing like it, and I'm surprised this wasn't put up for Speedy Delete as WP:ORIG. However, I do hope the author will not be scared off by the inexplicably stern tone of this AfD, but rather take the article back to the sandbox and work on it, using the Films article as a model. SteveStrummer (talk) 06:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If there's a chance for it to become anything like Films considered the greatest ever (although that article could stand more sources), keep. Otherwise, delete because all the choices here seem to be the creator's own opinion. Erpert (let's talk about it) 07:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete due to original research and bias problems. Saying that it was "unfortunate" that Friends′ The One With the Embryos missed an Emmy is not neutral. And saying that Buffy the Vampire Slayer′s Once More, With Feeling was "Emmy-award requested several times, but missed" makes no sense, because it would only have been eligible for an Emmy once, for the season when it aired, not "several times". --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Is there any way to base this article on something more substantial? I like the concept, because I think it wouldn't be bad to have some historic record of famous/great television shows due to the fact that it does allow future generations to have access to popular trends, but maybe we could add a few key facts that will make it more objective and less controversial. For example, could we call it "the most watched shows/episodes" or something, and then include numbers/statistics of how many people tuned in to watch these shows/episodes, and perhaps we could include a date/year/decade for these. The other option would be to have a top ten list of shows, and then just have people update it as new television shows come out that become another cultural phenomenon. Either way, Wikipedia is truly becoming a cultural phenomenon, so making this information accessible for the general public seems like a good idea.People bios (talk) 01:12, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's something like "Most watched" then you have to have an arbitrary cut-off limit, which will ultimately grow over time as you get people that like certain shows and feel that they should be on the list even if they don't meet the minimum. It would be even worse to have a "Top Tep list of shows", because of that very fact that you'd have to update it all the time. Wikipedia is about historics, it's not a TV guide. It isn't here to say, "this is what most people are watching today". The problem comes when you try and compare shows of yesteryears with ones of today. They don't mesh. More people own TVs (multiple ones) today than they did 20 years ago. It's unfair to compare episode numbers across timelines like that, and even doing it today you have to look at the networks themselves. Shows that appear on cable don't get as many viewers as primetime shows simply because the audience doesn't exist, not because the show isn't popular or well written. There are too many problems with such a list that it would be either impossible to maintain encyclopedically, or it would be impossible to get an accurate look at popularity or even reception. The page would just become an indiscriminate list of episodes that appeared on someone's top list of eps.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  02:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There's no necessary relationship between the most-watched episodes and the best episodes. If we put together a list of the most watched episodes of regular series in the United States (which is already discussed as part of List of most-watched television broadcasts anyway), we would have something like the M*A*S*H, The Fugitive, and Cheers finales, the episode of Dallas where they revealed who shot J.R., The Beatles' first appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show ... and a second-season episode of The Beverly Hillbillies titled "The Giant Jackrabbit". --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Hmph. As a huge fan of Buffy, I am saddened to vote "delete" on any article proclaiming Once More, With Feeling one of the greatest TV episodes of all time. This is a point of view I wholeheartedly agree with. Nonetheless, there is, to my knowledge, no formal scholarly framework that truly exists for a canonical representation of individual TV episodes as the greatest of all time. This can be contrasted with a point raised earlier in this AfD regarding films. To my knowledge, such a scholarly framework does exist for the discussion of film. So, sadly, my vote is to delete. Also, it is worth pointing out that Once More, With Feeling is only the second greatest Buffy episode. Hush is easily the show's finest hour. That's the one I use to silence friends of mine who mock me for my Buffy fandom! ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  19:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep in some form because a similar article exists for film and I can easily see the need for an article for this subject. However, the article as of right now needs to be completely gutted as it's nearly entirely original research. It also needs to be renamed to a name that more follows regular naming conventions, such as List of television show episodes considered the greatest ever, Television show episodes considered the greatest ever, or suchlike.  elektrik SHOOS  16:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be noted too that the article does attempt to use a source in some form, even if it wasn't properly cited. Many of the TV episodes listed in the table are also on TV Guide's List of 100 Greatest Television Episodes. This can count as a verifiable source for at least one list. I'm sure other lists like this. The similar article for movies bases its definition of what's considered a great movie not on original research but on established lists such as these - a new article for TV episodes could be constructed from similar lists.  elektrik SHOOS  16:46, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete as trivial original research. The only source that the author used is TV guide. Tavix | Talk  21:27, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * comment it is possible that this list just might be too volatile for a Wikipedia article...People bios (talk) 01:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per all the above arguments. Horrible point-of-view probems and original research. Maybe there is a respectable Films considered the greatest ever type article to be written and maybe not, but it is clear that this is not it. Reyk  YO!  23:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the sources are appropriate; TV Guide is a suitable source for this, and other well known publications can be added. Not  OR -- OR would be compiling a list based on our own judgements, not reporting what major sources have said, as is done here, is the way all Wikipedia articles are prepared (or at least ,the way they ought to be.)    DGG ( talk ) 00:44, 17 July 2010 (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.