Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of gags in Airplane!

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. I'll delete the fork, too. -Splash 22:30, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

=[[List of gags in Airplane!]]=

Unencyclopedic Airplane! cruft - WP:NOT. Delete. Note that most of the content already exists in [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Airplane%21 Wikiquote]. -- Norvy (talk) 20:30, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

: You might also be interested in List of comical gags in Airplane!. I don't know what the policy on this sort of thing is. --BadSeed 19:41, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

::It appears to be a copy of the existing article, created by BrenDJ. I suppose that rather than listing that as well, if this article is deleted, the other could be deleted per CSD:G4. -- Norvy (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep- --BrenDJ 23:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Very weak delete on the basis that it sets a precedent that would require similar articles for just about every comedy listed in Wikipedia. Suggest instead picking the best or most famous gags and listing them in the main article. 23skidoo 00:19, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Most of the content is already on Wikiquote. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Agree with Zzyzx11 and 23skidoo. --jet57 09:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC) 13:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOT. This is what Wikiquote is for. Proto t c 13:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. The whole movie is one long string of gags. Might as well just put up the script (which is probably already available on the Web anyway). Shantavira 08:15, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. There's no law against an encyclopaedic list of humor. Atlant 14:42, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's funny how people keep adding stuff to the content even as you encyclo-snobs argue whether it's "worthy" enough to be kept. Wahkeenah 00:30, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Definately a keeper! 02:31 12 September 2005 (UTC)

: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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.