Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gumbys

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Gumbys}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gumbys Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Gumbys}})

MY BRAIN HURTS! No Inadequate references. Tagged as needing references since 2012. My own searching finds mostly Monty Python fan sites and other non-WP:RS. The one WP:RS I found was [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/11082630/Michael-Palin-remembers-dressing-up-as-Gumbys-with-his-wifes-neurosurgeon.html an article in The Telegraph], but that's essentially an interview, and doesn't really have anything on which we could base an article. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:30, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

:Most of the article is based on the content of the show. That's all readily available as a primary source. Are you saying some of the shows have been lost? Or are you arguing that there are just not enough secondary sources, as per WP:PLOT? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep The nomination claims that the article has no references when it had two references. It is therefore apparent that the page in question has not been properly read or understood. The search for sources was likewise inadequate. There are, in fact, excellent sources out there for this and the page just needs work per WP:iMPERFECT. Andrew D. (talk) 00:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

::I have updated my nomination to indicate that the references, while not zero, are inadequate to show that this meets WP:N distinct from Monty Python as a whole. Yes, I know, AfD is not cleanup, but after seven years and no improvement, I pretty much assume it's never going to happen. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

:::RoySmith is presumably talking about the banner tag but that is useless clutter, contrary to our core policy of WP:V which expects citations only for quotations and controversial statements. The article has had thousands of readers in that time but the lack of specific complaints and {{tl|cn}} tags indicates that the readership has been reasonably satisfied with the stated facts. There was a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gumbys&diff=137396476&oldid=116332710 brief query] about the Steve Jones matter in 2007 but notice that an editor [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gumbys&diff=804477814&oldid=803390953 added cited content] ten years later. So, we see that it can take more than seven years for an issue to resolve and so RoySmith's assumption is evidently false. Of course, to get the article to a uniformly good state would require much more effort but 99% of our articles are less than good and that's accepted because no-one is paying for this work to be done. The topic is entertaining but far from vital. By raising this matter, the nominator is diverting editors such as myself from more pressing and important topics such as the decline in insect populations and biodiversity loss. This topic is a lesser priority and so this discussion should be speedily closed to avoid further waste of time and effort. Andrew D. (talk) 18:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect to Monty Python's Flying Circus Putting aside the logically flawed WP:HARMLESS argument by Andrew D. this article is obvious WP:FANCRUFT. There is little evidence of independent notability in secondary sources and the information can easily be contained within the parent article._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 04:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
• Comment - while List of recurring Monty Python's Flying Circus characters is entirely unreferenced, I think the topic is clearly sourceable (beyond the implicit sourcing to the show itself) and notable - that page would be the best redirect target. They're certainly mentioned in books about Monty Python, such as [https://books.google.com/books?id=J1CxIuG-_NkC&lpg=PP107&dq=gumbys%20python&pg=PP107#v=onepage&q=gumbys%20python&f=false]. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
• Comment: Keepers should identify multiple sources that include significant coverage (not just mentions). Failing that, merge to List of recurring Monty Python's Flying Circus characters. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:57, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to List of recurring Monty Python's Flying Circus characters: The subject appears to have limited notability and the list appears to be the best target. I agree with Finnusertop's comment. Aoba47 (talk) 17:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to List of recurring Monty Python's Flying Circus characters. Per {{u|Aoba47}}. Sensible solution given lack of referencing (will also improve referencing of List of recurring Monty Python's Flying Circus characters). This article has no long-term future as standalone. Britishfinance (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.