Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Kane tie-in websites
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. Ian¹³/t 17:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure that this could be speedied, but bringing it here for second opinion. We don't do lists of external links. The JPStalk to me 14:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the {{db-empty}} tag may be suitable for this page.--Andeh 15:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete by definition, a collection of links. Tom Harrison Talk 15:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and tag for cleanup. I'm not sure if the reason for deletion is notability or lack of content. If the issue is notablility;
- It's parent programme, Jamie Kane, is notable enough to have an article and so is this;
- Doctor Who tie-in websites has an article so this should too;
- The BBC have only done this for Jamie Kane and Doctor Who.
- It doesn't matter what Doctor Who gets. Every article has to stand on its own. You can't use another article to justify the existence of this. --Crossmr 16:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the issue is lack of information, I would like to point out that I intend to add to it, with a paragraph for each website explaining its relevance to the game and a screenshot. --Quentin Smith 16:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The reason for listing is above. We do not accept lists of external links. The Dr Who article is very different, in both quantity and substance. The JPStalk to me 16:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the article is no longer a list of links. If the style is wrong, please indicate. --Quentin Smith 16:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but it is still a lsit! It's now a list with descriptions. You see, the websites about the Dr Who articles aren't just external links -- they are of particular interest because they discuss websites that were embedded within the diegesis. The JPStalk to me 16:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- If this must be deleted, can it be merged with Jamie Kane? --Quentin Smith 16:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but it is still a lsit! It's now a list with descriptions. You see, the websites about the Dr Who articles aren't just external links -- they are of particular interest because they discuss websites that were embedded within the diegesis. The JPStalk to me 16:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment the article is no longer a list of links. If the style is wrong, please indicate. --Quentin Smith 16:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The reason for listing is above. We do not accept lists of external links. The Dr Who article is very different, in both quantity and substance. The JPStalk to me 16:26, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, List of websites. - Motor (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Wikipedia not being a link repository. Reyk YO! 23:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per above. StuffOfInterest 15:53, 15 June 2006 (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.