Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Gordon in popular culture

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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)[reply]

Jeff Gordon in popular culture (edit | 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)[reply]

Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 06:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[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.