399:-- and then start deleting all those blue-linked articles that have been created by someone identifying each "supercouple" (soaper couple?), beginning with the article "Cliff Warner and Nina Cortlandt". Okay, "Knowledge is not TV Guide" (writing this with a straight face).... and even if it is, this is a little too cute. Stop with
478:
subjective. A couple is either cited as a supercouple or a potential supercouple by the soap opera media...or outside of the soap opera media...or not. I will try to provide reliable sources for the few soap opera supercouples on the main supercouple list within the supercouple article that don't have them.
477:
even includes it within their standards, but, yes, the other half of the supercouples within the main supercouple article have reliable sources. Not exactly fansites, at least not in the definition of a fansite specifically for a couple. I also don't feel that what a soap opera supercouple is is
486:
New editors are coming to this article to add couples to lists, that are NOT even supercouples, as a way to get around the main supercouple article in which will NOT tolerate couples being listed on its main supercouple list that are not cited as supercouples by valid sources.
263:. They include the home page for a speakers' bureau, fansites and pages published by the networks. Even with reliable sources that happen to use the word "supercouple," there's no objective standard as to what constitutes a "supercouple."
88:
83:
92:
75:
293:
115:
473:, as for half of the soap opera supercouples in the main supercouple article not having reliable sources, I consider Soap Opera Central as reliable as they come, and
135:
Note that I didn't really remove the prod - I reverted back about 10 edits and then put the prod back which was inserted in the middle of the reverted edits.
427:- this is several steps too far. What's a supercouple? a major supercouple? and do we ever want an article entitled "List of major things and other things"?
314:
505:
491:
443:
431:
419:
407:
391:
372:
347:
324:
303:
283:
267:
247:
232:
219:
203:
188:
168:
156:
139:
129:
57:
333:, absolutely no objective inclusion criteria here, no attempt to define "supercouple", no attempt to define a "major supercouple", rife with OR.
367:
79:
243:
has a reference for each couple listed there being referred to as a supercouple. I think it would be easy to find references for these.
71:
63:
474:
458:
17:
465:
article, which has a valid link un-related to a fansite or the network which they are from, but if
Knowledge doesn't consider
381:
215:(Organising them by country) - list mentioned by Sancho can be removed/redirected/merged to this seperate list page.--
520:
36:
519:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
212:
361:
345:
225:
165:
136:
428:
150:
123:
244:
200:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
126:
484:
As for this article, I've been feeling for a while now that this article should be deleted.
440:
404:
400:
53:
416:
386:
280:
264:
229:
216:
185:
502:
488:
260:
109:
279:
for subjective "supercouple" and redundancy to list in the supercouples article.
462:
356:
334:
321:
300:
240:
197:
50:
501:: Even if they are superdoupercouples. Maybe I just don't get this one. -
469:
reliable in citing a soap opera supercouple, I'll replace its link.
513:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
259:- the sources for the half-dozen or so I checked are not
239:
Another comment: This doesn't have to be OR. The list at
355:
per everyone else - and it doesn't even explain what a "
105:
101:
97:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
72:List of major supercouples and other supercouples
64:List of major supercouples and other supercouples
523:). No further edits should be made to this page.
294:list of Actors and actresses-related deletions
122:Unsourced original research. Prod removed. --
8:
176:without this article, how will I know if
461:are a valid supercouple within the main
313:: This debate has been included in the
292:: This debate has been included in the
149:, fairly obvious listcruft, obvious OR.
7:
241:Supercouple#Soap_opera_supercouples
198:Supercouple#Soap_opera_supercouples
24:
475:Knowledge:WikiProject Soap Operas
459:Cliff Warner and Nina Cortlandt
315:list of Lists-related deletions
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
540:
211:. provides more info than
164:as listcruft, per Hammer.
506:18:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
492:23:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
444:19:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
432:05:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
420:02:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
408:23:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
392:21:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
373:17:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
348:15:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
325:12:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
304:12:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
284:06:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
268:02:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
248:06:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
233:05:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
220:05:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
204:05:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
189:05:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
169:04:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
157:03:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
140:04:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
130:03:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
58:04:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
516:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
224:Oh, and rename to just
380:Per all of the above.
415:- per, um, everyone.
213:Category:Supercouples
439:per nom., and all.--
226:List of supercouples
196:. Already a list at
467:a speakers' bureau
327:
318:
306:
297:
531:
518:
389:
384:
341:
338:
319:
309:
298:
288:
153:
152:Ten Pound Hammer
113:
95:
34:
539:
538:
534:
533:
532:
530:
529:
528:
527:
521:deletion review
514:
387:
382:
371:
368:r e s e a r c h
339:
336:
322:John Vandenberg
301:John Vandenberg
151:
86:
70:
67:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
537:
535:
526:
525:
509:
508:
495:
494:
480:
479:
447:
446:
434:
429:Carlossuarez46
422:
410:
401:Luke and Laura
394:
375:
365:
350:
328:
307:
286:
273:
272:
271:
270:
251:
250:
237:
236:
235:
206:
191:
171:
159:
143:
142:
120:
119:
66:
61:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
536:
524:
522:
517:
511:
510:
507:
504:
500:
497:
496:
493:
490:
485:
482:
481:
476:
472:
468:
464:
460:
456:
452:
449:
448:
445:
442:
438:
435:
433:
430:
426:
423:
421:
418:
414:
411:
409:
406:
402:
398:
395:
393:
390:
385:
379:
376:
374:
370:
369:
364:
363:
358:
354:
351:
349:
346:
343:
342:
332:
329:
326:
323:
316:
312:
308:
305:
302:
295:
291:
287:
285:
282:
278:
275:
274:
269:
266:
262:
258:
255:
254:
253:
252:
249:
246:
242:
238:
234:
231:
227:
223:
222:
221:
218:
214:
210:
207:
205:
202:
199:
195:
192:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
170:
167:
163:
160:
158:
154:
148:
145:
144:
141:
138:
134:
133:
132:
131:
128:
125:
117:
111:
107:
103:
99:
94:
90:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
68:
65:
62:
60:
59:
56:
55:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
515:
512:
498:
483:
470:
466:
454:
450:
436:
424:
412:
396:
377:
366:
360:
352:
335:
330:
310:
289:
276:
256:
208:
193:
181:
180:couple is a
177:
173:
161:
146:
121:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
463:Supercouple
357:supercouple
344:•
455:Mandsford
441:JayJasper
405:Mandsford
209:Weak Keep
471:Otto4711
417:Otto4711
388:TomasBat
281:Doczilla
265:Otto4711
261:reliable
230:ZayZayEM
217:ZayZayEM
186:Capmango
184:couple?
116:View log
503:MrFizyx
489:Flyer22
451:Comment
257:Comment
194:Comment
174:Comment
89:protect
84:history
499:Delete
437:Delete
425:Delete
413:Delete
397:Delete
378:Delete
359:" is.-
353:Delete
331:Delete
277:Delete
245:Sancho
201:Sancho
162:Delete
147:Delete
124:Onorem
93:delete
46:delete
362:h i s
182:super
166:Kevin
137:Kevin
110:views
102:watch
98:links
16:<
311:Note
290:Note
106:logs
80:talk
76:edit
403:.
340:yan
337:Ark
320:--
317:.
299:--
296:.
155:•
127:Dil
114:– (
457:,
453:.
228:--
178:my
108:|
104:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
82:|
78:|
54:13
51:Sr
48:.
383:â™
118:)
112:)
74:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.