Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earl's list

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 delete. Keep arguments are highly uncompelling, as is Stifle's comment. lifebaka++ 04:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Earl's list[edit]

This list is completely trivial and redundant to the main episode list. TTN (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The list is the main thing in this show. It's something like Island (Lost) or Fox River State Penitentiary. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The actual topic of the article is described in several (badly written) paragraphs in the main article. This article is just a list of trivia that should already be covered within the episode list anyways. TTN (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If that is so, then I propose that the article be merged into the main article instead of deleted. Quid Pro Quo²³ 22:38, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no content worth merging into the main article. The section there definitely needs to be cleaned, but it still covers the important prose in the article. The list obviously would be dumped, so that leaves nothing relevant. TTN (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. —treelo _radda 21:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this article should be kept due to non-trivial coverage in news sources. --Elisabeth Rogan (talk) 06:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as more or less a copyvio. Stifle (talk) 16:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is as fannish a page as I've seen in months. Unless/until NBC admits the writers wrote the entire list out before starting, and are now working through it, the list is simply a plot device, a macguffin, and should be noted as such int he show's article. The blog entry above can be discussed in the show article's talk page. Until that time, this is nothing but a NOT#PLOT, and SYNTH violation writ large. ThuranX (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2008 (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.