Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Differences in versions of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2nd nomination)

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. There are a number of claims on the Keep side that this topic is discussed heavily in a wide range of third party sources. There were however, no such sources when this AfD began, and far more importantly there still aren't. Subtract the primary sources, and one is left with a very large amount of synthesis and original research. Black Kite 13:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Differences in versions of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pure trivia, fan-cruft listing of the minute differences between adaptations. Unencyclopedic and unnecessary. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 22:03, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- There are a whole list of references listed in the article. BRIANTIST (talk) 15:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. article provides no argument for why this material is notable. no references to reliable third party sources mentioning the differences and why they matter to anyone other than fans (or even why they matter to fans, if published in a nonfan source). the whole article seems to be original research, as this is not published elsewhere (no references to such publications given after 3 years), and required the authors of the article to watch and read and listen to each version meticulously, and record all these differences. thats different than simply quoting a single primary source, which is obviously not original research. this is really at the far end of the OR spectrum. As a fan (but not a fanatic), i would care about any differences that either changed the tone/style, character behavior, or story arc, esp. if not specifically approved by Mr. Adams. Im not sure there are any, from my recollections of the material. if someone can provide refs showing an active discussion among film/literature/radio critics of the differences, or published works describing the differences, i would bow to it being included in WP. and i will leave it to defenders of the article to find sources, and hopefully not simply say "notable" or "referenced" (it really would need page refs for text passages)or (god forbid) "interesting" or "useful". of course, this is being offered for discussion on a Thursday, and maybe im just having trouble getting the hang of ths day...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 22:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Mostly harmless. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this may also be an in joke, so DON'T PANIC.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the material seems to be sourced to the works themselves, in my opinion going through them and making the comparisons/ noting differences in this way constitutes
host them or that they belong as part of a high-quality, free encyclopaedia. Guest9999 (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
- In addition - the page in its current form is not an article about the Differences in versions of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It is a list of every difference various editors have been able to come up with. Even if the topic was
  original research. Guest9999 (talk) 01:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Strong Keep and cleanup. A notable topic which has been the topic of multiple articles and books, and has significant coverage in books abut individual versions, in books, articles, TV and radio shows about the Hitch-Hikers guide in general, and biogrphies of Douglas Adams himself. Sources are easy to find. Note the differences aren't all minor, and some are referred to in different versions. This article has plenty of potential. Verbal chat 08:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the sources are easy to find, then why aren't they in the article? I would reconsider my delete if there were any non-primary sources provided. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree with Verbal. It has plenty of coverage, and is a notable enough topic. Dream Focus 10:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. TomCat4680 (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I guess the referecnes need cleaning up a bit, but I also agree with Verbal. BRIANTIST (talk) 15:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references are almost exclusively the source material itself - the books, cassettes, etc. Without coverage by secondary sources any two things could be compared in this way and the article could be said to have sources. For example for "
Wikipedia:Original Research "you must cite reliable sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented.". The sources do not support that there are differences between versions, they simply support what each version says. Guest9999 (talk) 10:45, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Differences between The Beatles and The Spice Girls

False analogy. This isn't The Beatles versus The Spice Girls, it's Hitchhiker's Guide vs Hitchhiker's Guide. — goethean ॐ 23:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that all the references are primary sources is enough to make them ineligible. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd like to see much more sources to show this is notable before further discussion. Bearian (talk) 19:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there are
no reliable, third party sources, but willing reconsider should that change. WFCforLife (talk) 14:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. There is much discussion of the differences within the articles for Douglas Adams and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and it is useful to have a summary of these differences. Unusually the books were written after the intial radio series and while being based on the radio series the books have significant differences in plot and order of events, so there is an argument as to which is the definite version of the story. There is a video clip of Adams himself discussing in an TV interview why the differences occur on this BBC page. Cjc13 (talk) 18:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup. I'm not sure whether linking to other WP articles that do have reliable, third-party sources satisfies that requirement, but the WP articles for those multiple versions that are compared here are comprehensive and could be good references for this article. Either way, I suggest someone archive this list to put on a popular or semi-official HHGG site and put a link to it from one of the HHSS WP articles. Resident alian (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I'm not seeing any secondary sources, in spite of the article rescue tag. Abductive (reasoning) 01:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Well-intentioned but basically a monolithic violation of
WP:SYNTH. No secondary sources as mentioned above. Shereth 15:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete All of the references cited are the original texts, and therefore primary sources and ineligible for Wikipedia. Once they are removed the article is completely unreferenced. That merely highlights that this is obviously a huge piece of original research. There is certainly a place on the web for this work, but Wikipedia is not it. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A mess of trivia and original research. Triplestop x3 00:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete
WP:SYNTH. A list of primary sources wont help this article. It needs independent reliable sources that discuss the differences in versions as the title suggests. Sarilox (talk) 13:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep The first time I read this series, almost two decades ago, the foreword to the collected edition discussed how the story changed between different radio versions, tv, and the first novel. The documentation to the text adventure from the 80s also mentioned that the story in the game did not scrupulously follow the radio or books either. Adams enjoyed these inconsistencies. There can't be any synthesis or OR if the author himself started pointing out the subject matter twenty years before Wikipedia existed. Miami33139 (talk) 17:48, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but the author's own comments in the foreword to his own work can hardly be considered an independent source. Abductive (reasoning) 20:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Agreed, but by size this material would not be merged back to HHG2G. Miami33139 (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2009 (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.