- 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 no consensus. After almost a month on AFD what is clear is that there is no consensus to delete. Whilst there is also no consensus on whether to merge, redirect, cleanup, or any other set of actions, that is an editorial matter which can be hashed out on the article talk page. Stifle ( talk) 08:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Jeff Gordon in popular culture
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Jeff Gordon in popular culture ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Yet another "X in popular culture" article that has ballooned to an ungodly amount of "every single time anyone said the words 'Jeff Gordon' in a work". Far too many of these are unsourced WP:OR or too inconsequential to even mention. While the sourcing is a bit better than most articles of this sort, it's still prone to synthesis -- the Tim Wilson song doesn't mention Jeff Gordon proper, just uses him in a jokey mashup manner. I suspect a great deal of WP:REFBOMBing is also in play, as this is far from the only example where the cited references do not verify this.
The list of works in which Gordon has appeared in cameos can be added as a filmography list in his main article, but everything else is in sheer violation of User:TenPoundHammer/Wikipedia is not TV Tropes. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Popular culture, Sports, and Lists. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:01, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Speedykeep - AfD is not a substitute for improving the articleand no actual Wikipedia policy is cited in the rationale.Any OR can be removed per BLP policy and merging to Jeff Gordon would make the target article too bulky. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 21:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)- If you remove the OR, then the article would be completely blank. I just proved that this entire article is
indiscriminate and confuses tangential name-drops (or even material completely unrelated to Jeff Gordon at all, such as the Tim Wilson song) with notability. None of the sources corroborate that the material has any relevance to Jeff Gordon or public perception of him, a fact I also proved by picking a couple examples. And last I checked,
WP:OR --which I cited --is a policy. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 21:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- If what's left after removing anything that's actually OR is sufficiently short, then it can be merged into the corresponding section in the parent article. Your own personal essay is not proof of anything. I agree that the article needs a serious cleaning, but I contend that it is indiscriminate or that literally everything is OR. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 23:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- If you remove the OR, then the article would be completely blank. I just proved that this entire article is
indiscriminate and confuses tangential name-drops (or even material completely unrelated to Jeff Gordon at all, such as the Tim Wilson song) with notability. None of the sources corroborate that the material has any relevance to Jeff Gordon or public perception of him, a fact I also proved by picking a couple examples. And last I checked,
WP:OR --which I cited --is a policy. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 21:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Further reading at MOS:POPCULT:
| “ | Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. Rather, all such references should be discussed in at least one reliable secondary or tertiary source which specifically links the cultural item to the subject of the article. This source should cover the subject of the article in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, television show, or other cultural item. | ” |
- Keep - Per Ghost of Dan Gurney: AfD is not cleanup, and this particular article being a mess of cruft is not reason enough to delete it. If the article gets cleaned up by an interested party and what's less has very little substance or value then it can be merged to Jeff Gordon or simply deleted, depending on what's appropriate in that scenario. HumanBodyPiloter5 ( talk) 12:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 17:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Per WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP. gidonb ( talk) 18:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. AFD may no be for cleanup, but this mess warrants
WP:TNT. This is beyond cleanup, if thi topic is notable, it needs to be tackld from scratch, first by showing there are reliable, in-depth sources that prove this topic meets GNG. Then probably 90%+ of what's here would need to go, if not more. The lead starts by making an unreferenced claim that he is an icon; this term is used in some sources, but they are pres releases. If there are reliable sources discussing his portrayal in pop cultue, are next to impossible to find this poorly referenced mess of chaotic mentions. Many refs are PRIMARY or fail
WP:SIGCOV. Blow this up. --
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 11:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please see
Wikipedia:TNTTNT and see how you've actually admitted that this is a topic worthy of an article. Are you willing to start it over yourself? If so, why do you want to hide the edit history and remove people's credit? Why is merging to the parent article not a viable option? This is a very lazy rationale, in my opinion. -
"Ghost of
Dan Gurney" 12:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ GhostOfDanGurney I am fine, and in fact prefer, merging whatever's rescuable and redirecting this to preserve history. I didn' notice your merge proposal, which I now support as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:26, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please see
Wikipedia:TNTTNT and see how you've actually admitted that this is a topic worthy of an article. Are you willing to start it over yourself? If so, why do you want to hide the edit history and remove people's credit? Why is merging to the parent article not a viable option? This is a very lazy rationale, in my opinion. -
"Ghost of
Dan Gurney" 12:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to Jeff Gordon#In popular culture as a WP:ATD while keeping the most major pertinent info. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 18:16, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Piotrus, or merge as compromise. A lot of this is redundant with the main Jeff Gordon article. If there is a notable separate topic, there is nothing to WP:PRESERVE from this due to a lack of independent reliable sources. If editors are really against deleting this, perhaps a short summary can be included in the main article. But I struggle to see it, because even the most famous actors don't typically have a list of every talk show they have ever appeared on. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory. Shooterwalker ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 17:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Could be a subsection in his article with notable appearances in films/tv etc. We don't need a list of everything he's ever been mentioned in. Oaktree b ( talk) 20:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Merge the actual notable appearances he's made in film/television (i.e. the ones that are more than cameos, use of archive footage, or "guest" appearances on talk shows) to the main Jeff Gordon article as a Filmography section. Nothing from the "Cultural References" section on should be merged, though, at those sections are basically lists of very non-notable trivia that boils down to "times his name was mentioned". Rorshacma ( talk) 23:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I !voted delete above, and I still think that's a valid solution. But Rorschacma proposes a solution that I see other editors getting behind, and Merge to filmography seems like a good way to hit the main points, and remove the more poorly sourced material with WP:UNDUE weight. Shooterwalker ( talk) 14:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment to closing admin: it's been another 8 days, and I see that multiple delete and keep !votes have said they would consent to a merge. That's the kind of compromise and WP:CONSENSUS building we should encourage. Shooterwalker ( talk) 17:57, 18 May 2022 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- 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 no consensus. After almost a month on AFD what is clear is that there is no consensus to delete. Whilst there is also no consensus on whether to merge, redirect, cleanup, or any other set of actions, that is an editorial matter which can be hashed out on the article talk page. Stifle ( talk) 08:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Jeff Gordon in popular culture
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Jeff Gordon in popular culture ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Yet another "X in popular culture" article that has ballooned to an ungodly amount of "every single time anyone said the words 'Jeff Gordon' in a work". Far too many of these are unsourced WP:OR or too inconsequential to even mention. While the sourcing is a bit better than most articles of this sort, it's still prone to synthesis -- the Tim Wilson song doesn't mention Jeff Gordon proper, just uses him in a jokey mashup manner. I suspect a great deal of WP:REFBOMBing is also in play, as this is far from the only example where the cited references do not verify this.
The list of works in which Gordon has appeared in cameos can be added as a filmography list in his main article, but everything else is in sheer violation of User:TenPoundHammer/Wikipedia is not TV Tropes. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Popular culture, Sports, and Lists. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 16:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:01, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Speedykeep - AfD is not a substitute for improving the articleand no actual Wikipedia policy is cited in the rationale.Any OR can be removed per BLP policy and merging to Jeff Gordon would make the target article too bulky. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 21:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)- If you remove the OR, then the article would be completely blank. I just proved that this entire article is
indiscriminate and confuses tangential name-drops (or even material completely unrelated to Jeff Gordon at all, such as the Tim Wilson song) with notability. None of the sources corroborate that the material has any relevance to Jeff Gordon or public perception of him, a fact I also proved by picking a couple examples. And last I checked,
WP:OR --which I cited --is a policy. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 21:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- If what's left after removing anything that's actually OR is sufficiently short, then it can be merged into the corresponding section in the parent article. Your own personal essay is not proof of anything. I agree that the article needs a serious cleaning, but I contend that it is indiscriminate or that literally everything is OR. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" 23:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- If you remove the OR, then the article would be completely blank. I just proved that this entire article is
indiscriminate and confuses tangential name-drops (or even material completely unrelated to Jeff Gordon at all, such as the Tim Wilson song) with notability. None of the sources corroborate that the material has any relevance to Jeff Gordon or public perception of him, a fact I also proved by picking a couple examples. And last I checked,
WP:OR --which I cited --is a policy. Ten Pound Hammer • (
What did I screw up now?) 21:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Further reading at MOS:POPCULT:
| “ | Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. Rather, all such references should be discussed in at least one reliable secondary or tertiary source which specifically links the cultural item to the subject of the article. This source should cover the subject of the article in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, television show, or other cultural item. | ” |
- Keep - Per Ghost of Dan Gurney: AfD is not cleanup, and this particular article being a mess of cruft is not reason enough to delete it. If the article gets cleaned up by an interested party and what's less has very little substance or value then it can be merged to Jeff Gordon or simply deleted, depending on what's appropriate in that scenario. HumanBodyPiloter5 ( talk) 12:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 17:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Per WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP. gidonb ( talk) 18:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. AFD may no be for cleanup, but this mess warrants
WP:TNT. This is beyond cleanup, if thi topic is notable, it needs to be tackld from scratch, first by showing there are reliable, in-depth sources that prove this topic meets GNG. Then probably 90%+ of what's here would need to go, if not more. The lead starts by making an unreferenced claim that he is an icon; this term is used in some sources, but they are pres releases. If there are reliable sources discussing his portrayal in pop cultue, are next to impossible to find this poorly referenced mess of chaotic mentions. Many refs are PRIMARY or fail
WP:SIGCOV. Blow this up. --
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 11:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please see
Wikipedia:TNTTNT and see how you've actually admitted that this is a topic worthy of an article. Are you willing to start it over yourself? If so, why do you want to hide the edit history and remove people's credit? Why is merging to the parent article not a viable option? This is a very lazy rationale, in my opinion. -
"Ghost of
Dan Gurney" 12:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ GhostOfDanGurney I am fine, and in fact prefer, merging whatever's rescuable and redirecting this to preserve history. I didn' notice your merge proposal, which I now support as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:26, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please see
Wikipedia:TNTTNT and see how you've actually admitted that this is a topic worthy of an article. Are you willing to start it over yourself? If so, why do you want to hide the edit history and remove people's credit? Why is merging to the parent article not a viable option? This is a very lazy rationale, in my opinion. -
"Ghost of
Dan Gurney" 12:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Merge to Jeff Gordon#In popular culture as a WP:ATD while keeping the most major pertinent info. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 18:16, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Piotrus, or merge as compromise. A lot of this is redundant with the main Jeff Gordon article. If there is a notable separate topic, there is nothing to WP:PRESERVE from this due to a lack of independent reliable sources. If editors are really against deleting this, perhaps a short summary can be included in the main article. But I struggle to see it, because even the most famous actors don't typically have a list of every talk show they have ever appeared on. Wikipedia is WP:NOT a directory. Shooterwalker ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 17:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Could be a subsection in his article with notable appearances in films/tv etc. We don't need a list of everything he's ever been mentioned in. Oaktree b ( talk) 20:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Merge the actual notable appearances he's made in film/television (i.e. the ones that are more than cameos, use of archive footage, or "guest" appearances on talk shows) to the main Jeff Gordon article as a Filmography section. Nothing from the "Cultural References" section on should be merged, though, at those sections are basically lists of very non-notable trivia that boils down to "times his name was mentioned". Rorshacma ( talk) 23:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I !voted delete above, and I still think that's a valid solution. But Rorschacma proposes a solution that I see other editors getting behind, and Merge to filmography seems like a good way to hit the main points, and remove the more poorly sourced material with WP:UNDUE weight. Shooterwalker ( talk) 14:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment to closing admin: it's been another 8 days, and I see that multiple delete and keep !votes have said they would consent to a merge. That's the kind of compromise and WP:CONSENSUS building we should encourage. Shooterwalker ( talk) 17:57, 18 May 2022 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.