Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Kids Week

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 merge to Jeopardy!. Merge to Jeopardy! or maybe list of the events. In any case, the consensus is that there is no need for a separate article. Tone 15:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeopardy! Kids Week

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

Not a separate television program—article subject is merely about sporadic weeks of episodes of Jeopardy! that would normally air during the course of the program that happen to feature children as contestants. WP:NOTINHERITED, and a handful of special episodes over the course of a season are not notable enough to warrant an entirely separate article.

Bulk of article (and all statistical information about individual episodes and scores) is unsourced and article has been tagged with {{refimprove}} for 2.5 years. Sottolacqua (talk) 00:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There has been a kids version of Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune for that matter. If this article can't be improved enough to be kept, then I would suggest moving any and all appropriate content to the main Jeopardy article and redirect. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 16:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Just to clarify, Jep! and Wheel 2000 are the articles for the separate versions which always featured children as contestants. The subject of the article nominated for deletion is merely a special week of shows for the parent program (Jeopardy!) that occasionally airs sporadically during the year. It is not an entirely separate television show like Jep! and Wheel 2000 were. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep--this nom follows Sotto's pattern of dozens of his recent AfD nominations: content gets spun off of the main article because it is too large, then Sotto nominates the spun-off article for deletion. Child articles are permitted as a way to reduce the size of parent articles. This is simply not a case of "notability not inherited". Robert K S (talk) 00:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—The content in this spin-off article is not noteworthy and can easily be summarized in a few sentences which would not increase the size of the main article. A random week of episodes featuring children as contestants, otherwise no different than any other week of episodes of Jeopardy! during the year, is not notable enough to warrant a separate article. The bulk of the article is entirely unsourced, and three of the four references in the article as it stands now pertain only to the Jeopardy! Kids Week#Kids Week Reunion section, which at best should be included in List of Jeopardy! tournaments and events#Special Tournaments and Events. This article is nominated for deletion in order to better organize content related to Jeopardy! Every minute aspect of this television program is not notable, and there have been an abundance of articles created that were classified as cruft and/or not notable that were later merged into the main article in a concise, appropriate manner, including the following:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Clue Crew

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Million Dollar Masters

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Jeopardy!

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Seniors Tournament

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Tenth Anniversary Tournament

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Million Dollar Celebrity Invitational

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest single day Jeopardy! winnings

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! recurring categories

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Brain Bus

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! set evolution (3rd nomination)

Since this television program has been airing episodes in various incarnations since 1964, obviously there are many notable aspects of the program that deserve more detailed descriptions. However, every minute detail about the program does not need a separate article if the information can be concisely summarized within the main or subsidiary articles. Additionally, many of the subsidiary articles lack what any editor would consider basic sources based upon WP:Verify and WP:Citing sources and contain large amounts of unverified original research. Jeopardy! Kids Week is simply another article that is not a notable aspect of this program in terms of Wikipedia's notability guidelines and does not warrant a separate article outside of the main article or summary of tournaments. Sottolacqua (talk) 03:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Jeopardy! per nominator. TomCat4680 (talk) 03:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Jeopardy!. I disagree with statistical information being unsourced; the episodes themselves can be sources per WP:SELFPUB. (Although some of the statistics seem rather trivial...) RJaguar3 | u | t 03:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and reference better.
Merge into List of Jeopardy! tournaments and events. The subject is not independently notable, but would suffice as a fine entry to a list.--hkr Laozi speak 04:38, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above; reasonable to merge to the list of tournaments because it's not quite standalone notable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Keep I agree that it should be merged into the main Jeopardy article as it's own little section (with a link to this article), but I strongly believe it's notable enough to merit it's own article. That being said, the article in it's current state needs some better refs. --Addi hockey 10^e-mail 05:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per the above reasonings; also agree with TenPoundHammer's concerns. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:39, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Perseus!Talk to me 18:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The fact that the show has a kids' week could be summed up in about one sentence. I don't think lists of winners are needed for winners of TV game shows. That's more the job of the shows' own websites and/or dedicated fan sites. Steve Dufour (talk) 08:10, 10 November 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.