Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Watergate scandal 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. --Core desat 05:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The Watergate scandal in popular culture

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unacceptable trivia list, per WP:FIVE and WP:NOT. The actual cultural impact is already covered in the main article. Eyrian 18:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as an almost unmaintainable list of minor trivia. Mr.Z-man  talk ¢ 20:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Casperonline 20:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge some of the elements and added sources please to the main article. It is a major history event in US politics and I think some elements can be transferred to the main article. Although an article looking like this (the IPC article) is not really acceptable.--JForget 01:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Another good call. Mr.Z-man says it best... it's minor trivia.  Mandsford 01:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I think at some point someone could write an article along the lines of how "-gate" entered our language as a synonym or suffix for scandal, with several linguistics references, but this is neither the germ of such an article nor encyclopedic. Carlossuarez46 20:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (without prejudice to later renomination) per the comments of User:Melsaran and myself at Requests for comment/Eyrian. The nominator is, broadly speaking, right that wikipedia should be purged of inappropriate trivia: however he and the other delete voters in this and a string of related AfDs are immediatists. The right approach is to give the matter considered thought, to review these types of articles with TLC and to extract from them the items that do have merit, and with what's left to consider whether a transwiki is a better option than outright deletion from the world wide web. The greatest weakness of wikipedia is the lack of respect that some members of the community have for the hard work of others, and an inability to see - or even to seek - the diamonds in the rough. AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Request to closing admin if this closes as a delete would you, instead, move it (protected if you feel it necessary) to a sub-page of User:AndyJones? AndyJones 07:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Andy Jones. Also, this seems notable in itself, with real cultural impact, and a 1st year college student (born in 1989) could use this article for research. Bearian 16:37, 6 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.