Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Journey of a Thousand Miles


 * 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 no consensus.  Majorly   (hot!)  15:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Journey of a Thousand Miles

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about a single episode. There are no reliable sources for the article to be more than just a plot summary. Attempted prods were contested, seemingly on priciple only. In this case merging is not an acceptable solution because the list of episodes or the main article would just become overwhelmed with needless plot details. Jay32183 22:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are from the same series and also have no reliable sources to improve beyond episode sammaries:
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Also note, I have been a major contrinutor to these pages. I have looked for reliable sources; none exist. The pages cannot be improved to a point where they satisfy the expectations set out in WP:EPISODE. Jay32183 22:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - we have a consensus to improve and not delete episode articles, see WP:EPISODE. - Peregrine Fisher 22:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - The consensus is to improve, not delete (see WP:EPISODE). I see no reasoning as to why they can't be improved. Matthew 22:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Matthew, PF, I don't know how many times I have to tell you guys, that is not what WP:EPISODE says. It says: "Wikipedia contains a large number of articles on television episodes. There is some disagreement as to whether every episode of every show "deserves" an article, which leads to a large number of AFDs for such articles. The following suggestions aim to promote the creation of high-quality articles about television shows and their episodes, which should help to reduce acrimonious AfD debates."
 * In other words, the point of WP:EPISODE is to encourage merges and preventing articles from being created as a way to reduce AfDs, and is not saying that we do not AfD episode articles. If we have nothing of value to merge, deletion is appropriate. I'm really getting tied of both of you making a point to show up at every episode AfD on a crusade to save every episode article, instead of judging them on a case-by-case basis. The consensus of WP:EPISODE is to prevent needless episode articles. -- Ned Scott 22:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If you want to merge these artilces into a season page, I guess that's OK too. We shouldn't be jettisoning the infobox, cast info, and plot summary.  Same with the room these pages provide for detailed external links to wikiquote and other sites.  For instance Dreamscape (Xiaolin Showdown).  We should be talking about how to improve these articles instead of deleting them. - Peregrine Fisher 23:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That information already exists on other pages so a merge is meaningless. The articles are just overly long plot summaries and "Shen Gong Wu tracking" which is really only for fanboys. I'll probably be saying this a lot; I've been working on trying to improve these articles for almost a year. There isn't anywhere for them to go. I own the DVDs, there is no commentary. Critics have not written reviews of individual episodes, only the series as a whole. There isn't meaningful information available. The list of characters already includes all of the cast information, so it's not like that needs to be preserved. Jay32183 23:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:EPISODE and WP:NOT #7. Some episode articles will be notable, but none of these are. Lets be realistic here, people. This is not the place to blindly defend unrelated episode articles, this AfD is about a specific set of articles. -- Ned Scott 22:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, this debate is only about Xiaolin Showdown and should not be taken as precedent for deleting more notable episodes like Abyssinia, Henry. Jay32183 22:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Ned Scott's comment -- Monty845 23:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete a whole lot of non-notable episodes of a single series. I seriously doubt anything useful will come of these after the "Shen Gong Wu" tallies and "Kimiko's outfit" things were added.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龍 ) 00:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge into List of Xiaolin Showdown episodes. Believe it or not, there is a rough consensus that episodes of major television shows do merit articles, and absent some kind of threshold to describe it, I say keep.  But maybe there does noeed to be some kind of discussion.  FrozenPurpleCube 01:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, that is another misconception people have when reading WP:EPISODE. An episode needs to be independently notable, and it is not enough that the series itself is notable. Not only that, but it violates policy if it's nothing more than a plot summary that isn't needed for the overall topic. -- Ned Scott 01:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinion, but you will note I did not refer to WP:EPISODE but rather it is my own opinion that there is such a rough consensus is from the observations I have made regarding episodes of television shows being on Wikipedia including discussions here on AfD. Would you like me to dig up the past AfD's I've seen to explain how I've come to that opinion? (Note I do not concur with your description of WP:EPISODE anyway, but I wasn't working from it, so it's a non-issue to me, other than to say I don't agree, and I think it's obvious more discussion is desirable since these things keep coming up). FrozenPurpleCube 02:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am mistaken, then, in linking your rationale with WP:EPISODE. However, your rational is still flawed, as "rough consensus" in this case is not often reliable. Very often we have articles and trends on Wikipedia that are more like, default human behavior, rather than an actual "consensus". All the time we have tons of new editors who simply just copy what they've seen and don't consider past discussions, guidelines, or even policy. The nature of many discussions then make people defensive, and become attached to their views and become more closed minded. A new user (or often an existing user) comes on, does a bunch of work they think is good, gets reverted because of guidelines or policy, they get defensive, thus they form a position. That to me is a false consensus.
 * And I think failing to recognize that people do care about the episodes of television shows, that they are distinct enough fictional works that they can be covered appropriately is a bad idea. It would be one thing if Wikipedia were paper, but it's not, so it can support more articles.  And if individual plays can get articles in paper encyclopedias, I think there's a good reason to include it.  Your concern about reversions and bureaucracy are certainly valid, but in this case, I think deleting these pages would be giving into the bureaucracy problem, not resisting it. FrozenPurpleCube 04:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Take your own comments, for example. In none of them have you address this specific show or how likely it is or isn't for these articles to contain real-world information. Rather, you've just presented generic arguments in defense of episode articles. Have you actually seen Xiaolin Showdown? The individual episodes are hardly notable. -- Ned Scott 02:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have seen the show, but that doesn't matter since I think there is a great deal of validity in covering individual episodes of most dramatic televisions shows. (the only exception I can think of is Soaps, which are not titled or otherwise discrete, so I consider them more one story line).   Since each episode of this show is a distinct story, and no different than most every other television show I'd support an article for, I therefore support covers of its episodes.  FrozenPurpleCube 04:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * In addition, merging is not an option in this case. The list of episodes already has sufficiently detailed plot summaries, so merging will make the list temporarily too long. Content will end up removed and we'll have redirects with really long histories because the merger happened even though the content didn't stick. Why leave a redirect with a history when there isn't content from it anywhere? Jay32183 01:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Because there's no sense in deleting the information since the effective cost is minimal? If you want to save Wikipedia's hardware, you'd need to do more than deleting a few article histories.  It's like boiling the ocean away with a candle. Besides, I'd say describing the various Showdowns (found in the episode articles, but not the combined page) would be worth merging even if nothing else was.  FrozenPurpleCube 02:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The showdowns are only of interest to fanboys, and is just very specific plot information. My reasoning for not wanting the history to remain has nothing to do with Wikipedia cleaning up its filespace, but with Wikipedia preserving an historical record of something it should have never had in the first place. Just so you know, I am a fan of the show. I leave Cartoon Network on as backround noise and the show is on almost daily. My opinion of the show is not effecting my opinion on what is best for Wikipedia. Also, I did a lot of the work saving Abyssinia, Henry at FAR/FARC, so don't assume I'm against individual episode articles in general. Notable episodes are definitely worth including and we should strive for feature status on such articles. These articles would never make FA by the way, they fail 1b. Jay32183 02:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not a "fanboy." I've seen maybe 3 episodes, but the showdown is an extremely important part of each episode.  Leaving that out would be like not mentioning the murder in an episode of Monk. - Peregrine Fisher 03:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Please tell me we don't mention every murder in Monk... -- Ned Scott 03:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically, we don't, since well, not all of the episodes of Monk have articles yet. FrozenPurpleCube 04:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am somewhat disquieted by any remark that declares something of only interest to fanboys. That's a subjective judgment on your part as to what people may care about, and not an actual reasoning on the subject.  Now me, I think the Showdowns represent a distinct feature of the series that easily qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia, as they make for a fairly important part of the episode, almost like the monsters in Power Rangers episodes.  FrozenPurpleCube 04:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyone know if this or this is a reliable source? Also, this site has storyboards and comments by a XS director that could used for production information. - Peregrine Fisher 03:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The first is a review of the season one dvd set, it just happens to mention two of the episodes. The second doesn't have anything more than what Wikipedia already has, except user reviews, which aren't so reliable. The third doesn't actually have production information, because he wasn't a director, he was the animation director. That means he was in charge of the animators. The important production information would come from the writers. We probably will get about as much as we would looking up information on the general animation process but with specific names, which isn't actually helpful. Jay32183 03:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * So they are reliable? - Peregrine Fisher 04:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The first and the third are reliable for what little content they have, the second is about as reliable as imdb or tv.com. You won't be getting much out of them though. You'll be able to further confirm plot details. But you won't get stuff like how the writers came up with ideas, or critics views on individual episodes, other than that "The Journey of a Thousand Miles" establishes the series by being the first episode. I read that review a long time ago. Jay32183 05:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per reasons given by Ned Scott. Season articles warranted at the most in this case. &mdash; O cat ecir  Talk  06:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There already exists List of Xiaolin Showdown episodes so these articles are not needed for the reasons I set forth. When so much rdetail goes into such an article, it inevitable goes into original research unless there have been multiple independent sources with substantial coverage of the particular episode. Merge Merge plot summaries into a list of episodes for each season. If there already exists such a list of episodes with plot summaries, then these could be Deleted. For series I follow, which does not include this one, I find it useful to catch up when an episode is missed and there is a plot arc or characters appear, to help follow subsequent episodes. It is also useful to readers when they happen on a series to catch up on the backstory. It is absolutely not necessary to recapitulate every frame of video in an overlong O.R. synposis of every episode to achieve this. With suitable spoiler warnings, we can give more detail than the "teaser" summaries on websites from the show creators. The basic events in an episode can be sourced to the episode, just as a plot summary of a play or book can be sourced to the work, without being original research.Edison 13:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep My own reason for keeping these episodes is that Xiaolin Showdown has a linear plot in which the events of one episode affect later episodes. In my opinion, it's when the events of one episode generally have no effect on the others that per episode articles are redundant.  Trim the articles to remove the stuff that shouldn't be there, but keep the articles themselves. Caerwine Caer’s whines  00:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That doesn't address the real issue of having no real world context. Jay32183 00:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * These articles are part of a larger topic. There is no deadline, although this AfD has created a deadline of this week.  Wait for improvement.  Yes, it may take a while, maybe years.  So what?  That's not a reason to delete.  WP:EPISODE recommends a merge at the most.  Some of the seasons have won emmies, so merge into season pages if you like.  Everything here now attributed to the primary source. - Peregrine Fisher 01:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, WP:EPISODE does not say that articles cannot be deleted. There isn't anything to merge, so merging would be pointless. Also, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. There aren't any sources now, so delete the article now. If there are sources in the future, then the articles can be recreated. Don't perserve pointless, useless content just because we can. Jay32183 01:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:EPISODE
 * "Generally, articles on episodes of television should not be listed for AfD (unless they are completely unverifiable, original research, etc.)." - These articles are verifiable and do not contain OR.
 * "If the articles are very short, consider merging them into another article (e.g. an article about the show itself, an article that is a list of episodes of the show, or an article that summarizes the plot for one season of the show)." - Merge into season pages if you want. That would help with garnering a good amount of outside sources per article.
 * Seems pretty clear to me. Merge at most, don't delete. - Peregrine Fisher 01:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Your interpretation is completely wrong. The reason AFDs should be avoided is the burden it can put on admins, not that articles on episodes are safe from deletion. There is nothing that can be done to help these articles. The list of episodes arleady exists and contains plot information, what would we merge for? The episode list is sufficient for the series. The series was only three seasons long, and there isn't further detail on those either. I cannot understand why you would want to save long plot summaries as if they were encyclopedic content. If that's what you're looking for, Wikipedia is not the place to do it. Jay32183 01:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Why does it say they shouldn't be put up for AfD unless they're unverifiable or OR then? That sounds like a criteria to decide if they should be deleted, hence put up for AfD, not a labor saving device.  Also, one of those links I mentioned earlier is a season review.  I'm sure reviews can be found for the other seasons as well. - Peregrine Fisher 02:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * You're attempting to blindly apply precedent without considering the specifics of the situation. Not all episode articles are the same, you shouldnt treat them all the same. Also, it was not a season review. It was a review of the DVD set. Notability on Wikipedia requires multiple third party sources, not a single review. You've got one guy's opinion. If this were not an individual episode then deletion would happen at this point. You should not be taking WP:EPISODE to mean that articles are protected from deletion. I've spent a lot more time looking for sources for these articles than you have, the articles are not going to improve except for quality of prose. We need to be focusing on quality of quantity. That means not retaining articles that can never be complete. Merging won't give a complete article, it'll give you a whole bunch of plot summaries on one page rather than one plot summary on each of several pages. How is a season article going to be written beyond just taking a single season off of the full episode list. There are 52 episodes, the list is not overly long. These articles should be deleted and it will have no effect on Abyssinia, Henry or other important episode articles. I'm fairly certain that you don't actually care about these articles, but about episode articles in general. If that's true, then you really need to take a step back and think about what you're really doing. Not all individual episodes should have articles and these are among those that should not. Jay32183 03:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * A little google searching makes it clear to me that season 1 could be easily refed. They released the DVDs by season, and that's how the reviews are organized.  This, this, and this can be found on the first two pages of a google search for Xiaolin Showdown season 1.  If someone who knew what they were doing wanted to spend the time creating AfD proof season pages, they could.  As you say, I'm not a XS fanboy.  I just believe that good articles can be created on this subject, and I don't think deletion brings us any closer to that.  It seems like you worked pretty hard on some of these pages, according to the history for "The Journey of a Thousand Miles."  I really wish you would have spent your time merging them into season pages, then I could start reffing them right now.  Speaking of Abyssinia, Henry and other FA episode pages, I'm not worried about them being deleted after they achieve FA status.  I'm worried about them being deleted before they're FAs.  For instance, Pilot (The 4400 episode) was up for deletion, and it was a close call.  It's since been improved a bunch.  I know you tried and couldn't improve these articles, but just give it time.  If you want to tag team a merge of these pages, I would be willing to help with that. - Peregrine Fisher 05:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I am still against merging. Those are all reviews of the DVDs, not of season 1. In fact, it doesn't talk about the quality of the show at all, it talks about the quality of the DVDs. It goes into some plot detail, but the problem was we only had plot detail to begin with. Deletion is the best option, and I actually feel that a merge would be worse than keeping the articles as they are now. Jay32183 17:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Looking at the first review link from above, it has stuff we could use. "The characters are rather simplistic and stereotypical at times, but the show does offer ways for them to evolve and develop."  "The episodes deal with several small adventures that build toward the final showdown between the good and bad sides."  "A lesson is always learned in defeat."  " There is an issue of repetition."  " Each season presents a whole new enemy however, so each season is kind of self contained, but still contributes to the series on the whole."  That sounds like the start of a good season page to me. - Peregrine Fisher 17:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That doesn't make for a good season page at all. Maybe some commentary on the main page, but there isn't any assessment specific to a season or an episode. There are reviews of the series and reviews of DVDs. What you need for these to not be deleted is not there. Jay32183 00:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * All those comments are about the first season only. They don't represent how the reviewer feels about any other episode.  You're probably right that this kind of info should be incorperated into the main page, but it should also go on a season page.  Redundancy is a good thing in this case. - Peregrine Fisher 07:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all per WP:EPISODE. Consensus, as presented in the guideline, has generally been that articles on individual episodes should be (1) improved, (2) merged, or (3) left alone. I see no reason why this case should be any different. -- Black Falcon 00:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Additional note: discussion about a merge, probably the most advisable course of action in this case, ought to be conducted outside of AfD, on the target page's talk page. -- Black Falcon 00:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That is not what WP:EPISODE means. The articles cannot be improved, there is nothing to merge, deletion is the only thing that can be doen to benefit Wikipedia in this case. According to WP:EPISODE, these pages should never have been created in the first place. WP:EPISODE should probably be deleted if people are only going to use to blindly prevent deletion of crappy articles that can never be good. I wrote a good deal of these articles and I will be the first to say they suck. There's no room for improvement, and merging will just create one really big bad article that will just lead to another AFD. No one has presented a valid reason for these articles to be kept. People have only been talking about episode articles in general. This is not a discussion on episode articles in general, it is about these articles, which should be deleted. There is no content here worth saving, so stop trying to save it. Jay32183 00:51, 18 April 2007 (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.