Talk:The Burning (Seinfeld)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Burning (Seinfeld) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 11 December 2020. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Bot bleep
|
|---|
Fair use rationale for Image:Seinfeld s9e16.jpgedit Image:Seinfeld s9e16.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. |
#c-BetacommandBot-2008-01-24T05:57:00.000Z-Fair_use_rationale_for_Image:Seinfeld_s9e16.jpg){kind=link}
Title
editGuesses about the exact reason that the title was chosen should not be included in the text unless a cite is provided. No matter how obvious the guess may seem, without a source, it is Original Research. Ashmoo (talk) 12:36, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Redirect
edit@Some Dude From North Carolina, Calidum, Onel5969, and Slashme: Please discuss whether this page should be redirected, rather than edit warring over it. I've protected the page for two days. GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- Comment. As the person who filed the WP:RFPP request, I will say that I am remaining neutral about whether or not it should be a redirect. I will however recommend that a better way to gain consensus is to nominate it for WP:AFD or request a merge. OcelotCreeper (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- WP:BEFORE shows a brief book mention and not much else. I think AfD is a good idea. --Slashme (talk) 08:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- Comment - this is truly a no-brainer about redirection. Virtually zero in-depth sourcing available. Onel5969 TT me 12:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- Redirect - all plot with no actual information. Some Dude From North Carolinawanna talk? 12:59, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Some Dude From North Carolina, Calidum, Onel5969, and OcelotCreeper: I've taken GorillaWarfare's advice and started an AfD discussion. --Slashme (talk) 12:31, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Some Dude From North Carolina, Calidum, Onel5969, and OcelotCreeper:Every single Seinfeld episode has it's own page; it makes 0 sense for this to be the only one that acts as a redirect. Jericho735 (talk) 13:36, 27 December 2021 (UTC)