Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of Futurama


 * 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 per WP:NOR, which is not subject to amendment by consensus. Watching a TV show and writing up a timeline based on what one sees is original research, and with one exception only epishodes from the show are cited as sources. Those wanting to keep the artice do not even address this issue. Sandstein 18:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Timeline of Futurama

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This timeline contains far too much original work. Even if we tore it down and started again, a definitive Futurama timeline would require far too much original work. As a major objection, the years given for many of the episodes are strictly conjectural. Only about 30% of the episodes can be tied to specific dates and the remaining dates do NOT fall out naturally from this - the timeline goes backwards at least once between episodes (regardless of whether we take production order OR broadcast order). That means these dates aren't just guesses, they are very likely to be INCORRECT guesses. There are many more references which are either guesses, extrapolation, or clearly copied from the fan-made timelines listed at the bottom. A definitive timeline of Futurama is a subject which should be (and has been) pursued by fans, not listed on Wikipedia. SamSim 13:57, 18 July 2007 (UTC) Keep - doesn't seem to be hurting anything, and seems decently-sourced. Guroadrunner 01:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator's reasoning. Too much guesswork/OR involved. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:ILIKEIT, therefore Delete per nom. Clarityfiend 15:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per OR or maybe transwiki to some futurama wiki somewhere? Corpx 16:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Well referenced to episodes, I believe we have a timeline for Harry Potter and Star Trek and Star Wars. See: Category:Fictional_timelines —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs).
 * Keep per User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Scholarly research on a matter of great importance. ~ Infrangible 02:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but remove originally-researched points. There are numerous references in the show of significant events that have occurred during the time Fry was frozen or the beginning of the universe. These are almost always stated with a specific year. These points are not OR. The timeline condenses many significant points about the series that aren't notable enough to be mentioned in any other articles. -- Will Mak  050389  03:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Provides a useful timeline for the series, and actually provides references to episodes to document these "facts". Alansohn 04:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep well sourced, but could do with a bit of cleanup. Lugnuts 04:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as of above per Alansohn--Fluence 22:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original synthesis organized in an in-universe way. I see lots of arguments to avoid above; we don't keep original research because it's harmless, and we don't organize things in an in-universe way just because fans might find that useful. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete No real world context, original research, no reliable secondary sources. Jay32183 16:58, 23 July 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.