Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who spoofs - Wikipedia

Article Images

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 no consensus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This assortment of trivia and plot summary fails the general notability guideline with no significant coverage in reliable, third-party, sources. Just an indiscriminate collection of fancruft. McWomble (talk) 14:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Indiscriminate, poorly sourced list. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 17:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to ??? - the criticisms are valid but is there another home for (at least some of) this material? - Fayenatic (talk) 21:46, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy to the Doctor Who WikiProject. Some items on the list are more notable than others and lumping them all together as similar would do the page a disservice. Let the interested people separate the wheat from the chaff. A second option would be to redirect to the list of episodes which already mentions a couple of noteworthy spoofs. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just trivia and plot summary. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 15:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are plenty of references for this. The external links even have a BBC article about one of the parodies. Showing how many times a show has been parodied demonstrates its influence over time on popular culture. Dream Focus 02:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but reorganize. Also, I agree with Dream Focus regarding influence on popular culture. 24.113.77.218 (talk) 01:39, 10 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.77.218 (talk) 01:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC) — 24.113.77.218 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete. Trivial listcruft at best. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with Dream Focus and 24.113.77.218 on the show's influence on popular culture - It's been around for 46 years, and it's been spoofed quite a bit with every single Doctor getting the treatment. Hence, it stays. Daniel Benfield (talk) 02:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If the show has influence in popular culture that can be discussed in the main article or Doctor Who in popular culture, noting WP:POPCULTURE. Listing every spoof is trivial listcruft. ShipFan (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A lot of this needs better sourcing, and some of it isn't spoofs but homages. Still, there's enough notable take-offs to keep a viable article. Fences and windows (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable subject and notable subjects parodying another notable subject. BBC is a notable source, and there is extensive out-of-universe literature on Dr Who which must surely mention this. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. DGG
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. DGG
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. DGG
Keep with no prejudice against trimming the list to clear and unambiguous instances with support in reliable sources. Given that sort of trimming, I expect a much better article to result. Jclemens (talk) 21:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets notability etc. for sure. Does it need pruning? Yes - but that is not a reason for deletion. Collect (talk) 22:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Trivial listcruft that is attempting to document every comedic mention of Dr Who. Ryan4314 (talk) 08:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.