Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Fictional couples


 * The following discussion is an archived proposal of the WikiProject below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or the WikiProject Council).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The resulting WikiProject was not created

Description
This project must cover fictional couples/duos. George Ho (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * List of important pages and categories for this proposed group
 * fictional duos (number of pages in the category: 105 )
 * soap opera supercouples (number of pages in the category: 46 )
 * fictional duos (number of pages in the category: 105 )
 * soap opera supercouples (number of pages in the category: 46 )
 * fictional duos (number of pages in the category: 105 )
 * soap opera supercouples (number of pages in the category: 46 )


 * List of WikiProjects currently on the talk pages of those articles
 * Please invite these and any other similar groups to join the discussion about this proposal. See WikiProject_Council/Directory to find similar WikiProjects.




 * Why do you want to start a new group, instead of joining one of these existing groups?
 * Wikipedia deserves another WikiProject: Fictional couples. Many couples have a lot of media coverages. Soap opera couples have coverages. Nevertheless, I don't know if I want to start this project; someone more experience can handle this project. If "couple" is wrong, how about "duo"?

Support
Please specify whether or not you would join the project.
 * 1) George Ho (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Oppose: The given articles arent really notable and i doubt there are enough reliable sources that will make them notable. So i dont think there is or ever will be enough notable articles for such a task force to exist.Lucia Black (talk) 08:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: Clark Kent and Lois Lane and Luke and Laura aren't notable couples? The abundance of reliable sources out there discussing these couples proves otherwise, granted the Relationship of Clark Kent and Lois Lane article needs to be filled with such text/sources. If these two couples weren't notable, their Wikipedia articles would have been deleted by now. And what is meant by "enough reliable sources" to makes a topic notable? Three or more? Because, if they are outside sources that are discussing the couples, that's all it takes. I also wouldn't call a Wikipedia article notable. It's about whether or not the topic it's discussing is notable.


 * But anyway, similar to you, I feel that there aren't enough fictional couple articles, notable couples or otherwise, for such a force. Most are soap opera couples, and some of them cannot provide notability or show any other reason that they deserve an individual article. Flyer22 (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Superman and Lois lane has only one source and so many issues, that article can easily be deleted. Luke and laura is the exception. The other is category and the other article is based only on 1sr party sources.Lucia Black (talk) 21:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * A topic's notability is not based on the state of the article. See WP:Notability. I was making the point that despite the current state of the Relationship of Clark Kent and Lois Lane article, Clark and Lois are a notable couple and the article can be populated with reliable sources showing that. Flyer22 (talk) 18:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose I don't see any use for this, to be honest.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  14:48, 9 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: not broad enough in scope and issues with sourcing. See Romance novel and Romance film. Why confine it to soap opera and comic characters when you have Rhett and Scarlett or Aragorn and Arwen or Rick and Ilsa, Cathy and Heathcliffe or Elizabeth and Mr Darcy who are all much more famous romantic couples. Remember, to provide notability and avoid being original research, articles need to provide sources that discuss the romance, it can't be put together from sources that just discuss the characters separately.  There are a number of sources for literary and film romantic couples, that discuss the work in terms of romance, or look at literary/film romances as a theme.  I just don't think the sources are there for soap operas, and they are marginal for comics. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say that George is trying to limit the proposal to soap opera and comic characters, Elen. After all, he listed one prime time couple (even though they can also be considered "soap opera-ish"), as well as WikiProject Fictional characters and WikiProject Television. The reliable, outside sources are there for some soap opera couples, but not for most. And most of the fictional couple articles on Wikipedia are of soap opera characters. That's why I don't feel that this project can flourish (we already have WikiProject Soap Operas, and it's barely active), unless enough people start making couple articles for prime time and film couples; that said, sources usually don't focus on the popularity/impact of prime time and film couples. Focus on the couples in sources, and not just the characters, is mainly a soap opera element because couples are the staple of the soap opera genre. Flyer22 (talk) 18:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Why not launch this as a WP:TASKFORCE of WikiProject Fictional characters? Fences  &amp;  Windows  22:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Its still not broad enough for a task force. Seems rather rushed and not properly thought up to even make some group dedicated to couples.Lucia Black (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose this should be a workgroup for WikiProject Fictional characters, if it is to be created. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 05:49, 1 March 2012 (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 project's talk page (if created) or at the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.