Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Through the Looking Glass (Lost)


 * 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 keep. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 02:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Through the Looking Glass (Lost)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Only sourced element is the writers of the episode Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 15:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Many of the episode pages linked to in Category:Lost (TV series) episodes are a fair length. This question seems to want to expand to: "Keep them all, or delete them all?" Anthony Appleyard 15:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete rampant Lostcruft. It has a trivia section?  Wrong.  It is a trivia section.  Take it to LostWiki. Guy (Help!) 15:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Reluctant delete but advise creator to userify first, given that it will be (legitimately) re-created as soon as the programme airs. -  irides centi   (talk to me!)  17:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me ask something: what is the point of deleting this article if everyone acknowledges it will soon be re-created, and rightfully so? We know the episode is going to air, and several sources have confirmed its title and centric character.  What is inherently wrong with this article?  Shikino 18:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with Shikino, this article will be recreated in a month, it's not like we can delete and salt the earth. This page will exist, maybe the editor's time is not going to be available then and they have created it a couple of weeks early so they will save time in the future. If the AFD is successful then the victory will be short. Why not AFD the previous three episodes. If the AFD is successful then the nominator should recreate it when the episode airs. On a separate point, editors use their free time to edit and one has created a page a few weeks early for an event that is inevitable then why punish them with an AFD for being bold. Darrenhusted 18:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Policy.  S   e   rgeantBolt  (t,c) 19:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - sourced, no point to deletion to be recreated.. trivia should also be added (which I'll do). Matthew 19:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per precedent. I'm not sure if the nominator is trying to set another precedent re: not allowing the writers of the episode to be the sources, however I do believe WP:SOURCE (or one of those related policies) does actually allow this. In any event, this is an article based upon an episode of a notable TV series for which other episode articles exist. The "policy" quoted by SergeantBolt makes no prohibition on creating articles on upcoming episodes. 23skidoo 19:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems like a waste of time and effort with this nomination given that the episode will air in only a month and will most likely be recreated in half that time with more information. It is also notable in that it is the season finale. I agree with 23skidoo there is no policy prohibiting this article's creation. Additionally, this so called "policy" mentioned by SergeantBolt is not even a policy. It's a guideline by a Wikiproject and even that does not support what he advocates. K1Bond007 20:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the other keeps. Acalamari 21:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The articles will be re-created soon enough anyway, so you'll only be wasting time in deleting it. Manipe 22:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * "All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source."

- Attribution Whether or not the episode airs in a month's time isn't the point. The point is, nothing in that article is sourced apart from who is writing the episode. The air date isn't confirmed, the title isn't confirmed. Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 17:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The air date is confirmed. --thedemonhog talk contributions 23:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, maybe I was being a bit over the top. This is barring any accidents causing ABC to reschedule (as BBC almost had to shift Doctor Who back a week for the football. It's unlikely, but something could happen). Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 01:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep It's frustrating that this even needs discussing. The episode will be broadcast, American network television is nothing like the BBC. Politicalwatchmen 16:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep They are defiantely going to broadcast it88.111.204.41 19:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Season finales of major television series should be notable enough for inclusion, but please please remove any original research and synthesized material not obtained from published third party sources.  Burntsauce 20:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * DELETE: No official confirmation - speculation. - Silva  Storm  
 * Delete but with no objection to recreation when sourced info is available At this point, there isn't even a source for the episode title - if it stays it needs a big CITIATION NEEDED on the article title. --Minderbinder 14:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * keep - if the episode is going to air in a month. I also think it's worth pointing out that the article was only created April 14 and was nominated for AfD 21 hours later. Was it tagged "unreferenced" first? It's quite obviously a stub, why the rush? AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 22:38, 21 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.