Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Bad

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. Singu larity 00:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big Bad

Neologism. Original research. kingboyk (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not even a notable neologism. Cosmo0 (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and hope that the Buffy fan reads up on either notability or one of the wp-projects on TV shows... this has no real notability. Worse yet, it may confuse people who look up "Big Bad" thinking about the big bad wolf, or somesuch. Epthorn (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep And add sourcing. I've seen this phrase used in multiple discussions of the show and how the season long plotlines are structure. This is not original research. Rray (talk) 23:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add sources. I've seen quotes from Joss Whedon using the term in desribing the development of the show. But even without that, if the uses in other works were more formally cited (instead of loosely in passing in the text), that sufficiently establishes continued use (i.e., not a neologism) and notability. Tag those statements as citation needed and let the cleanup commence. *debates whether to create a macro for "AfD is not for cleanup."* —Quasirandom (talk) 04:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CitiCat^♫ 00:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Content sounds sourcible, but unless there is some sort of documentation to say why this is a notable term and not just another neologism, then it should be deleted. --Nick Penguin_(contribs) 00:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and add sources. However, I think it came from Big Bad Wolf. /* aba dafa */ +C0 00:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't a notable idea. So redirect it to the Buffy article. I (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and source. It's a fairly common term with enough notable history to warrant an article -- Masterzora (talk) 01:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I accept that this phrase is in use, and should be in a dictionary, but Wikipedia isn't a dictionary. It should be moved to Wiktionary if sources can be found. An article in an encyclopedia about a 2-word phrase simply stating where it was first used, and listing TV series in which it has been used just seems wrong to me.--Michig (talk) 10:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This phrase goes back at least 74 years to the Oscar-winning Walt Disney cartoon. It is now a cliché rather than a neologism. Since usage is so widespread, the article still has much potential. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Big Bad Wolf" goes back to the children's story. The other google news hits are for 'Big Bad something' rather than just 'Big Bad' as a phrase in itself.--Michig (talk) 10:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and since Big Bad Wolf already has an article on WP, the argument to keep this article because of "Big Bad Wolf" seems incredibly weak.--Michig (talk) 10:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of Big Bad Wolf is a good new point. I suggest that we merge/redirect into that article. Colonel Warden (talk) 13:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that this should be merged or redirected. The phrase "big bad" in this context doesn't refer to the "Big Bad Wolf"; it refers to the main villain during a season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It would be similar to merging "lightening bug" with the "lightening" article. Rray (talk) 13:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article as it stands is about 'Big Bad' as a phrase, first used in Buffy. It hardly says anything about the Buffy villain. An article about said villain may be worth including in WP, but this article isn't it.--Michig (talk) 18:36, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and source, as per Quasirandom. Can someone source it now, in fact? Tphi (talk) 03:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Merge it with Big Bad Wolf, add it to a trivia section. --Shark face 217 02:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The article claims it is a term that originated from the show. There is no notability claims. The term meets the definition of a Neologism (as written). Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 16:06, 17 December 2007 (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.