Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of The Bill episodes

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 keep. Courcelles 00:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Bill episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Individual season links: 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20 • 21 • 22 • 23 • 24 • 25 • 26

All the seasons have individual articles, so there is no point in duplicating things by having a complete list as well. WOSlinker (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - List of The Bill episodes is the parent article for the season articles; it should not be deleted. There are several featured lists of television episodes for which there are articles about the seasons as well; this treatment is standard for lengthy television series. See, for example, List of 24 episodes, List of Lost episodes, and List of The Simpsons episodes. Neelix (talk) 23:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - As Neelix stated, a summary of a multi-season television show greatly benefits from a list of its episodes. Although, the detailed information for each episode (such as synopsis/plot) should be removed, and saved for those seasons which have articles. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 23:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I think the season-level articles should be deleted instead—apart from the first few series, The Bill didn't have "seasons" per se, and essentially ran continuously for over 20 years. The breakdown by year has just been done by various episode guide sites to break up the 2,500 into manageable lists. Nothing wrong with basic details and a very brief synopsis for each episode, as per the many example of episode lists on Wikipedia. --Canley (talk) 01:07, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That would be a good alternative. I don't see any point in having the same information in two places as it means more work to keep both in sync and updated. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I made this suggestion two months ago and carrying it out proved infeasible. I have therefore spent a considerable amount of time over the past two months cleaning up the season articles so that the list of episodes (the parent article) could be shortened to only include the episodes' air dates, prod codes, and titles. The main list is far too long as it is and needs to be shortened as I am in the process of doing; to delete the season articles would be to strip out much important information that should not be included on the main list. Neither the main list nor the season articles should be deleted. Neelix (talk) 16:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sorry, I hadn't looked at the articles in question for a while and hadn't seen the work you've done on them. I agree, both the whole list as an index and the series-level articles should stay, they don't contain redundant or unwieldy amounts of information. As for keeping them "in sync and updated", The Bill was cancelled a few months ago—there will be nothing to update or sync once the lists are filled out and completed. --Canley (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both the parent list and season articles (though as a British show, shouldn't they be series articles?) per WP:MOSTV#Multiple pages. Both are acceptable under established guidelines. Frickative 16:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Thanks for pointing that out; I'll go change the titles accordingly. Neelix (talk) 17:21, 20 December 2010 (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.