Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Planets 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. — Kurykh  00:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

The Planets in popular culture

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - directory of loosely associated topics with a dose of "seems to be based on"-style original research. As with so many other of these sorts of lists, this one tells us nothing about the music, nothing about the fiction that uses the music, nothing about the relationship between them and nothing about the world in general. Otto4711 13:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nominator's argument. The topic fails notability standards in lacking significant independent coverage.  Without any established real-world context, this article's contents are trivial and unencyclopedic. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletions.   —Erik (talk • contrib) - 14:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * delete trivia collection.Mukadderat 15:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment none of the above discusses this particular article. Speedy close, since no actual reasons based on the specific content have been given. DGG (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't even know how to respond to so ridiculous a comment, other than to say you must really be getting desperate given that so many of your other arguments in similar AFDs have been so roundly rejected. Otto4711 01:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't even know how to respond to so ridiculous a comment, other than to say you must really be getting desperate given that so many of your other arguments in similar AFDs have been so roundly rejected. Otto4711 01:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, I do wonder why DGG has not also voted keep and instead writes it as a comment? Also I see here is a blind backlash against lists and popular culture articles. Too often I see people having the misguided view that popular culture somehow automatically means it is not encyclopedic. Mathmo Talk 00:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * variety. and to show I don't respond by copy/paste. :) DGG (talk) 02:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. As nom says, article violates WP:NOT and WP:OR. It's not that popular culture is unencyclopedic; it's that the game of "spot the allusion (or what one thinks might be an allusion) and add it to Wikipedia" is not an encyclopedia-building activity. Deor 01:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this isn't about popular culture, it's a list of mostly trivial references in films, TV, etc. This tells us nothing about popular culture. Crazysuit 02:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * and what do you think the media of popular culture consist of?DGG (talk) 02:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." María ( críticame ) 12:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as a violation of WP:NOT. The so-called "sources" are only primary and do not establish notability nor the subject's importance in popular culture.  I remember the "Escape From Pompeii" in Williamsburg reference only vaguely, which made me smile, but this and many others on this list are far too trivial to be worthy of an encyclopedia.  María ( críticame ) 12:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete all %SUBJECT% in popular culture lists, they are nothing but trivia and violate the five pillars of Wikipedia as well. Burntsauce 17:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mathmo, and as it seems to be improved per WP:HEY. Need yet more cites, cutting out the cruft from the list. Bearian 20:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete if kept, delete all but the adaptations and rename List of adaptations of The Planets, the only redeeming feature of the article. Carlossuarez46 21:03, 2 August 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.