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. - Mailer Diablo 12:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jimi Hendrix in popular culture

[edit]

Delete - this is an indiscriminate list and directory filled with unsourced and trivial items seeking to gather together every appearance of Hendrix and every use of one of his songs appears in any medium, with no indication of the information's importance either in the fiction it comes from or in the real world. See for precedent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rush in popular culture 2. Otto4711 03:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 03:27, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Now this has some original research, and I don't see the need of a extensive list of Hendrix appearances and references. If they're not in the main article, then they're clearly not important pieces of information. ' 04:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - again, just a random collection of unencyclopedic facts, and nonsensical as Jimi Hendrix is part of popular culture. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 11:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nonsense original research is good but not encyclopedic--Cometstyles 13:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - it looks like this, along with most articles in Category:Musicians in popular culture are being AfD'd. If that's the case, what about most of the articles in Category:Representations of people in popular culture and each category up the tree from there? Would it be allowed if referenced like AC/DC in popular culture or should that also be considered a useless list and get AfD'd? And since this is an internet discussion, I will bring up Hitler (and why not Stephen Hawking too). Does something make AC/DC more "worthy" than Aerosmith? — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 13:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The category tree is extensive. I've been reviewing the articles and as I find ones I consider AFD-able I'm AFD-ing them. It takes some time to do that. The AC/DC article was just nominated and closed with no consensus. If a consensus develops that these sorts of articles should be deleted, the AC/DC article can be renominated. Otto4711 17:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - Take the most notable and merge into the already established sub-section. Delete the rest JameiLei 15:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Cruft! Cited information could easily be condensed into a paragraph or two on the main Hendrix page. Ckessler 07:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the same reasons I've cited in the AfD's on Aerosmith and Stephen Hawking in Popular Culture; it's original research and 'popular culture' is a very ambiguous term that is very US centric, or at least Western centric. --The Way 08:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete trivia section. Funny, I was just thinking someone should start an "exterminate all Simpsons trivia" movement. Gazpacho 11:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Cleanup verify etc.. but nothing inherently wrong with the articles existence. -- Stbalbach 23:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete wikipedia rules say WP:OR should go.. but its a shame, as its good information thats going to be lost. Thedreamdied 00:10, 21 February 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.