Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural depictions of Elvis Presley

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. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 15:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural depictions of Elvis Presley

Cultural depictions of Elvis Presley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete - This article was split off from

• Note: This debate has been included in the
  SkierRMH 03:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete. Detailing every reference to Elvis would simply be a long list of unnotable trivia, whatnot with his immense popularity and influence. ' 04:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Any important cultural figure will have a lot of "cultural depictions" That, combined with silly trivia like "Elvis had a pet rabbit named Dean, after James Dean", make this a permanent
  list or repository of loosely associated topics. szyslak (t, c) 07:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete - purely an
  indiscriminate collection of information. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 11:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep. Splitting off trivia sections from the main article prevents useless trivia from collecting in the main article. I had trouble even getting the Elvis article to load on my computer before I split off the trivia section. Now those who want to add information about what TV shows Elis has been mentioned on have a place to do so. As for it being an indiscriminate collection of information - it's true that it isn't the most organized article, but with some effort it can be brought up to the standard of some other similar articles (like the Joan of Arc and George Washington ones). YankeeDoodle14 18:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• If the content is "useless trivia" then it belongs neither in the main article nor in a separate article. The proper response to useless trivia in articles is to delete it, not split it off. Otto4711 06:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I agree with YankeeDoodle14. Elvis is notable as are his cultural contributions and a fork from the main Elvis page is warranted. That the article could use work is a call for better editing, not for deletion. Bbagot 19:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Cruftalicious. As I have stated on the AFDs for similar pages, this stuff could easily be condensed down to a paragraph or two, and added to the main Elvis page. Ckessler 07:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Elvis is a notable figure who has been portrayed both seriously and not-so-seriously in an extensive amount of media over the years. I see this as a worthwhile spin-off of the main artcile. 23skidoo 22:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Cleanup verify etc.. but nothing inherently wrong with the articles existence. -- Stbalbach 23:01, 20 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.