Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yu Yu Hakusho Episode summaries

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was no consensus, so keep. Mackensen (talk) 04:42, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yu Yu Hakusho Episode summaries

Sorry, this does not seem encyclopedic to me at all. WhisperToMe 02:33, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't think it's an unencyclopedic topic, but it's utterly rife with typos and bad grammar, only covers a handful of episodes (of which there are surely dozens) in waaay too much depth, and (sniff, sniff) smells like it was copied from somewhere. If it's to be done, start from scratch and do it right. -- 8^D ^gab 02:57, 2005 Apr 15 (UTC)
• Keep and tag for cleanup and expansion. This is an encyclopedic topic, and the content is quite far removed from nonsense or being unreadable. Meelar (talk) 03:28, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Leaning toward keep if this isn't a copyvio. Man, talk about a cleanup job, though! BD's solution isn't out of the question IMO. - Lucky 6.9 03:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Reading through the article, I'm afraid I'd have to agree with 2412, even if I think it's a worthy topic. Delete content, list on requested articles. Radiant_* 07:59, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not encyclopaedic, possible copyright violation, cruft. Megan1967 08:54, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, agree with Megan1967 --Bucephalus talk to me 11:22, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep unless proved to be a copyvio. No reason that Star Trek should be allowed to have episode summaries if this isn't. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:59, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• No vote. If it's a copyvio, it's not from the web-- it would have to be a text source. I'm really opposed to all of this pop culture stuff, but clearly there is presently a huge precedent for including it. Is there any hope of creating a WikiPopCulture project and transwikiing all the pop culture stuff over to it? (sigh) Mwanner 12:37, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Another idea would be to create a "minipedia" within wikipedia which doesn't show all the pop culture, high schools and uninhabited villages to casual visitors. Kappa 14:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually there were plans for a 'light' version of Wikipedia, which seems to consist of a series of pages that link to 'highly encyclopedic' articles. What exactly qualifies as such is unknown to me, but likely would not include Yu Yu Hakusho. The idea was to get a comprehensive 'pedia with about 10000 articles. I don't believe the project is presently active. Radiant_* 15:45, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Starblind. Kappa 14:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep looks like crap, but if we delete this, there's a lot of other stuff that has to go, too. Condense with great gusto, though. --InShaneee 15:49, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I already voted but I'd like to chime in again and state that I very much oppose just assuming something is a copyvio because it's long and in-depth. Accusing an editor of having unlawfully copied an article is one of the most serious accusations we can make here on WP, and in the spirit of assuming good faith, we shouldn't do it unless we have some sort of evidence. If an article is deleted, it should be based on something provable. Voting to delete because something might be a copyvio is silly (and a Google search verifies that this isn't copied from the web and doesn't look like a print source either). Deleting based on looking like a copyvio is every bit as silly as putting someone in prison because they look like a criminal type. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:29, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • I understand that copyvio is a harsh accusation - I suggested it based not only on the length and depth, but also on the writing style, the format of the original posts (with large blocks of centered or indented text dropped in at a time) and the fact that it was initially posted by an anon (e.g. someone who may be unaware of copyvio policies). No offense meant to anyone, but it has enough signs to at least raise legitimate suspicions. Also, it turns out that there were a something like 112 episodes, and a few movies. As I said before, I'm not calling this unencyclopedic, just suggesting that, all things considered, we may be better starting from scratch with this one. -- 8^D ^gab 06:21, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
• Keep, seriously in need of a clean up and probably some trimming as well and I suppose renaming for capitalisation... There are two series listed on IMDB does anyone know if it's the 2002 or the 1992 version or is the article meant to be about both? Lochaber 17:11, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, subtrivial fancruft, probable copyvio. Wile E. Heresiarch 22:56, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Popcult trivia, WAY too granular. --Calton | Talk 02:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.