331:- I can't stand this show, but given that Knowledge (XXG) isn't paper, and that it's certainly a very successful show, and that this level of detail has been found appropriate for other very successful shows that have penetrated the pop culture consciousness (eg The Simpsons), I'd err in favour of keeping it. I certainly don't think it's going to harm or confuse anyone attempting to find information, and there's a good chance of it genuinely helping. -
498:
There's no indication of that trend reversing on those shows any time soon - not one of the
Simpsons episode pages are currently up for deletion - so I think it's a relevant contrast. We allow those pages because the legacy of the show is so great and its cultural impact so significant that the level of detail is useful to go into. I can't personally understand what makes the Law & Order shows so enduring, but they
492:
Knowledge (XXG) is not a democracy; the best argument wins, not the most common one. And I don't think you've fairly summarised my arguments (although I'm sure you were attempting to do so in good faith and I appreciate your contribution!). I'm not merely saying the article does no harm, I'm saying
497:
refers to contrasting an article against individual other articles that may themselves require deletion - what I'm saying is that there is a clear and continuing policy of sufficiently notable shows having an entry for each and every episode, most notably The
Simpsons and a great many sci fi shows.
520:
I'm not suggesting that this is a vote; I was merely correcting the count offered by DGG and expanding on what I believed the rationales of the keep !voters were and why I don't agree that they justify keeping the article or overcome the arguments of those calling for deletion. There is a clear and
430:: I removed the prod , and it seems I was right about it being controversial; controversial means that there are likely to be good faith objections, because whenever there are to a prod, the matter should be heard here if deletion is to be pursued. --at this point there are 2 keeps and 3 deletes.
207:
that indicate that this particular episode is independently notable. PROD removed with the assertion that all deletions of every television episodes are controversial, which is not true. Merge and redirect is not necessary as the article's information is reproduced in its entirety at
165:
72:
552:
As noted in the nomination, the entire content of this article is available at the season 1 L&O:CI article (linked to above). Should anyone be interested in this particular episode, a search will lead them to the content either through
493:
it may be positively helpful to those with an interesting in researching this bizarrely successful show, and that possibility of usefulness is not balanced against any possibility of misleading or confusing other users. And
159:
99:
94:
103:
86:
126:
587:
and now agree that it applies here and is contrary to my argument. I've learned something as a result of your participation - thank you very much. I accordingly change my vote to
285:
470:("I certainly don't think it's going to harm or confuse anyone...") and the other is based on the unsupported assumption that there must be sources out there somewhere.
180:
147:
90:
529:(emphasis in original). Many individual episode articles have been deleted despite the popularity or cultural impact of the series. The notability of the series
693:
676:
629:
610:
574:
511:
483:
441:
420:
391:
358:
322:
300:
272:
243:
225:
209:
141:
56:
82:
62:
137:
542:
538:
318:
502:, with no sign of abatement, and I can't see any clear reason for saying there's nothing to be gained from having individual episode pages. -
187:
387:
17:
153:
708:
366:
completely unnotable episode of the series. No significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. Completely fails
36:
561:, something I find highly unlikely but not outside the realm of possibility, the deletion of this article would leave
314:
530:
525:. Per that guideline, The order of creation should be: Series article → episode list → individual episode page,
707:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
596:
554:
507:
354:
336:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
381:
310:
296:
268:
474:
requires the confirmed existence of independent reliable sources that substantially cover the subject.
375:
533:
to each individual episode and reliable sources are always a requirement. Most if not all episodes of
584:
522:
521:
continuing guideline regarding when individual episode articles should be created, as summarized at
346:
689:
671:
592:
503:
350:
332:
173:
467:
253:
625:
606:
570:
479:
239:
221:
53:
48:. I tried to delete it yesterday, but scripting problems prevented me from doing so. Remedied by
654:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
292:
264:
658:
494:
463:
371:
527:
if there is enough verifiable information from secondary sources about individual episodes
404:
309:- You can make a GA out of this, but it will take a lexisnexis account for one so old. -
234:- No reliable sources, and this individual episode doesn't seem to therefore be notable.
204:
563:
the overall episode list as the first result and the season 1 list as result number four
466:("this level of detail has been found appropriate for other very successful shows") and
685:
663:
549:
episodes have individual articles, not because of the popularity of the program itself.
49:
545:
status. It is because of the existence of these independent reliable sources that all
471:
408:
400:
367:
200:
621:
602:
566:
475:
437:
235:
217:
583:
Thank you for your polite and well-explained further argument! I was not aware of
413:
620:
My pleasure. Thanks for keeping an open mind and for an enjoyable back-and-forth.
120:
432:
73:
Articles for deletion/Seizure (Law & Order: Criminal Intent episode)
258:
to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
701:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
537:
have such sources, often sufficient sources to improve them to
562:
116:
112:
108:
172:
263:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
186:
214:Seizure (Law & Order: Criminal Intent episode)
559:Seizure (Law & Order:Criminal Intent episode)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
711:). No further edits should be made to this page.
286:list of Television-related deletion discussions
657:that analyze this episode. Article is a mere
8:
462:deletes and two keeps. One keep is based on
210:Law & Order: Criminal Intent (season 1)
280:
83:Seizure (Law & Order: Criminal Intent)
63:Seizure (Law & Order: Criminal Intent)
284:: This debate has been included in the
216:is an extremely improbable search term.
70:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
684:to an appropriate list of episodes.
69:
24:
601:moved comment to the end of mine
599:) 06:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
557:or, should they happen to search
339:) 00:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
694:13:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
677:05:20, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
630:06:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
611:06:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
575:04:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
531:does not automatically devolve
512:04:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
484:03:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
442:02:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
421:01:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
392:00:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
359:06:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
323:00:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
301:00:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
273:00:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
244:07:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
226:04:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
57:19:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
728:
405:reliable secondary sources
704:Please do not modify it.
555:Seizure (disambiguation)
458:At this point there are
409:the Notability guideline
32:Please do not modify it.
653:, I'm not finding any
68:AfDs for this article:
655:secondary sources
613:
303:
289:
275:
719:
706:
675:
668:
600:
539:featured article
416:
407:; handily fails
378:
341:Vote changed to
311:Peregrine Fisher
290:
262:
260:
256:
205:reliable sources
203:as there are no
191:
190:
176:
124:
106:
44:The result was
34:
727:
726:
722:
721:
720:
718:
717:
716:
715:
709:deletion review
702:
664:
662:
414:
376:
254:
251:
133:
97:
81:
78:
66:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
725:
723:
714:
713:
697:
696:
679:
647:
646:
645:
644:
643:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
615:
614:
593:DustFormsWords
578:
577:
550:
515:
514:
504:DustFormsWords
487:
486:
449:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
394:
361:
351:DustFormsWords
333:DustFormsWords
325:
304:
277:
276:
261:
248:
247:
246:
194:
193:
130:
77:
76:
75:
67:
65:
60:
50:User:MZMcBride
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
724:
712:
710:
705:
699:
698:
695:
691:
687:
683:
680:
678:
673:
669:
667:
660:
656:
652:
649:
648:
631:
627:
623:
619:
618:
617:
616:
612:
608:
604:
598:
594:
590:
586:
582:
581:
580:
579:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
556:
551:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
524:
519:
518:
517:
516:
513:
509:
505:
501:
496:
491:
490:
489:
488:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
443:
439:
435:
434:
429:
426:
425:
424:
423:
422:
418:
417:
410:
406:
402:
398:
395:
393:
389:
386:
383:
379:
373:
369:
365:
362:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
338:
334:
330:
326:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
305:
302:
298:
294:
287:
283:
279:
278:
274:
270:
266:
259:
257:
250:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
230:
229:
228:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
206:
202:
198:
189:
185:
182:
179:
175:
171:
167:
164:
161:
158:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
139:
136:
135:Find sources:
131:
128:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
74:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
703:
700:
681:
665:
650:
588:
558:
546:
543:good article
535:The Simpsons
534:
526:
499:
459:
431:
427:
412:
396:
384:
377:Collectonian
363:
342:
328:
327:
306:
281:
252:
231:
213:
196:
195:
183:
177:
169:
162:
156:
150:
144:
134:
45:
43:
31:
28:
661:retelling.
293:Ron Ritzman
265:Ron Ritzman
160:free images
585:WP:EPISODE
523:WP:EPISODE
472:Notability
399:as wholly
347:WP:EPISODE
686:Edward321
672:reasoning
666:Abductive
468:WP:NOHARM
401:unsourced
622:Otto4711
603:Otto4711
567:Otto4711
547:Simpsons
476:Otto4711
388:contribs
319:contribs
255:Relisted
236:Skinny87
218:Otto4711
199:- fails
127:View log
54:MuZemike
428:Comment
415:pd_THOR
166:WP refs
154:scholar
100:protect
95:history
651:Delete
589:Delete
495:WP:WAX
464:WP:WAX
411:. —
397:Delete
372:WP:NOT
364:Delete
343:Delete
232:Delete
197:Delete
138:Google
104:delete
46:delete
682:Merge
438:talk
374:. --
181:JSTOR
142:books
121:views
113:watch
109:links
16:<
690:talk
659:plot
626:talk
607:talk
597:talk
591:. -
571:talk
508:talk
480:talk
460:four
382:talk
370:and
368:WP:N
355:talk
349:. -
345:per
337:talk
329:Keep
315:talk
307:Keep
297:talk
282:Note
269:talk
240:talk
222:talk
212:and
201:WP:N
174:FENS
148:news
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
541:or
500:are
433:DGG
403:to
317:) (
291:--
188:TWL
125:– (
692:)
628:)
609:)
573:)
565:.
510:)
482:)
440:)
419:|
390:)
357:)
321:)
299:)
288:.
271:)
242:)
224:)
168:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
52:.
688:(
674:)
670:(
624:(
605:(
595:(
569:(
506:(
478:(
436:(
385:·
380:(
353:(
335:(
313:(
295:(
267:(
238:(
220:(
192:)
184:·
178:·
170:·
163:·
157:·
151:·
145:·
140:(
132:(
129:)
123:)
85:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.