Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural depictions of Sammy Davis, Jr.

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 to delete, thus kept. Note that this is the same result as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Hawking in popular culture. —Doug Bell ^talk 07:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural depictions of Sammy Davis, Jr.

Delete - indiscriminate list and directory of trivia. We do not need a list of every time Davis is mentioned in a TV show, film or song. Otto4711 08:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC) (edit: Strongly oppose merger of this content back to Sammy Davis, Jr. because it would be no better as a section of that article than it is as a standalone.) Otto4711 08:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 19:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a trivial, indiscriminate, non-encyclopaedia list of information. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 11:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete trivia section. Gazpacho 11:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Artcle created in line with other trivia sections on people, such as Stephen Hawking in popular culture, Emperor Norton in popular culture and Henry Darger in popular culture. A separate article also streamlines the main Sammy Davis article, and provides a place for people to see how Sammy is often depicted in popular culture. Gareth E Kegg 16:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Hawking article is also up for deletion. The other two aren't yet but may well be soon. WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is insufficient to keep an article. As for the idea that this article "streamlines" Sammy Davis, Jr. that may very well be true. However, if this information doesn't belong in Sammy's article, the solution is not to dump it off into another article. The solution is to remove it completely. Otto4711 18:23, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Cleanup verify etc.. but nothing inherently wrong with the articles existence. -- Stbalbach 22:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:SUMMARY. This topics is notable enough, with substantive material. A brief summary section of pop culture references in the main article on Sammy Davis, Jr. and a link to this subarticle is a suitable way to organize the material. Pop culture keeps appearing across Wikipedia, so while it doesn't really interest me, it does interest lots of people. I suggest looking to Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc (featured list) as an example of how these lists/articles can be done well. --Aude (talk) 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting is not a valid retention criteria. And if this list were anything approaching Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc there would be no problem with it. This list is nothing like that one and there is no indication that it can ever or will ever be like it. WP:SUMMARY is a guideline. If a list falls afoul of an actual policy then guidelines don't matter. Do you honestly believe that Wikipedia is served by knowing that Adam Sandler said the words "Sammy Davis, Jr." in a song about eating turkey, or that They Might Be Giants mentioned his name once in a podcast? Is that really the sort of information that belongs in an encyclopedia? Otto4711 15:57, 24 February 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.