Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Strangelove in popular culture

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 given that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and there is no sourced information that can be kept or merged. --Core desat 04:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Strangelove in popular culture

Trivia fork full of times said movie has been (or may have been) referenced. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural references to 2001: A Space Odyssey and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural references to The Shining for precedent. Biggspowd 14:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

delete in popular culture The way to deal with bloated trivia sections in articles is to purge them, not to split them out into whole new "articles" with nothing but trivia. Guy (Help!) 15:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. MSJapan 15:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - indiscriminate list, directory of loosely associated items. trivia, take your pick. Otto4711 16:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, because this film has had a strong influence on culture and even appears in textbooks we used in college! Therefore, it is something students could find helpful as a reference for their courses. --172.133.145.96 20:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might want to take a good look at WP:USEFUL. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph of WP:USEFUL talks about when Useful is a valid argument. The anonymous user above seems to be appealing to it in that sense; and I agree with 172.133.145.96 in this case. Capmango 22:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took film classes in college too and in no instance would we ever have studied a list of every single time the film or a character from a film was mentioned in every other medium. Otto4711 00:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Guy has the right idea here. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the list has gotten crufty and should be trimmed to things that truly reflect the effect of the film on popular culture. Seeing how a film has influenced popular culture is one thing for which people turn to encyclopaedias. Capmango 22:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pare this down or Delete. Lists of pop culture references do not need to include every reference ever. If anyone ever invents a Wikicommandment on this one, it should be something like "Do not list obscure references to legendary events"Mandsford 23:12, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The subject of this article is historically significant. Ebay3 07:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just because a subject is notable doesn't mean a bunch of subarticles are suitable for here. 2001 and The Shining are also historically significant subjects, but those articles were deleted too. And a similar page about Star Wars was also removed. Biggspowd 22:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 10:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because this article is largely a list of indiscriminate trivia in disguise. Per directory standards, most of the entries are not famous because they have a mention of the film. Per notability standards, the topic is supposed to be explored through "significant coverage" that address the subject of Dr. Strangelove in popular culture directly, instead of extracting it from the firsthand observations of the editors themselves. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems like someone has a personal vendetta against all the pop. cult. articles. Comment are all the articles in Category:In popular culture and Category:Fictional works in popular culture going to be deleted too? Why have these cats? Lugnuts 15:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories aren't any more prominent than the popular culture articles are. There's no personal vendetta -- it's clear that many popular culture articles are biting the dust based on the rationale of multiple editors. Per WP:NOT#DIR, a list of items that are not made famous as a result of the entity is indiscriminate. If a book or a film was a direct influence of Dr. Strangelove, that would count, but a quote used from the film elsewhere doesn't warrant encyclopedic mention. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the film is notable; its impact on society is notable; random references to it in pop culture is not. ck lostsword•T•C 21:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't merit it's own article. Gather together the most notable half dozen and merge them back to the film's main page. A1octopus 18:16, 27 June 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.