Talk:List of American Horror Story: Freak Show characters

Re: removal due to lack of external sources

The articles for most other movie and TV show characters also lack authoritative external sources, e.g. the article for the character Richard Castle just links to the IMDB page for the series, the official website, and an in-universe website page from ABC

The only exceptions are for print characters (e.g. Marvel/DC, with references to specific comics/comic pages) or from IPs that have official Databanks (e.g. Star Wars)

I don't see the problem with the article as it stands. It's useful, of public interest, and I don't see any edit wars about the characterization of this or that character (where external sources backing up a claim might be relevant) Thranduil (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Thranduil, you've been here for quite some time, but you don't have a lot of edits to your name. In case you don't know, the WP:BURDEN to restore content when it's unsourced is on the person reverting, not the other way around. This 42k characters long article has two references, which are primary sources and do not help. Are you intending to add sources here? Otherwise I'd suggest you undo your revert. Wikipedia is not Fandom or any other dedicated fansite, we need proper sourcing, also on fictional elements. WP:ITSUSEFUL or WP:ITSINTERESTING aren't arguments to keep something unnecessarily. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 17:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. You can undo my edit, i apparently can't. I'll be sure to avoid Wikipedia whenever I want information about any work that hasn't been studied extensively or academically and seek out Fandom wikis or dedicated fan sites instead.

By the way, who is the onus on to add { {cn} } or { {verification needed} } to any specific content they think is unreliable/subjective/otherwise unfit before effectively deleting a 42k character long article that has some utility and value? I would have thought it's on whoever plans on removing the content, but apparently I'm not as up to date on Wikipedia guidelines as I thought. Thranduil (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind. You already answered my question with WP:SURMOUNTABLE. Articles shouldn't have their entire content removed using arguments such as WP:RUBBISH or WP:IMPATIENT, which is what your argument boils down to, I think. EDIT: WP:MOSTV also doesn't mention anywhere that contributors need to provide abundant (or any) references for TV show lists of characters. MOS:PLOTSOURCE similarly only states that "The plot summary for a work, on a page about that work, does not need to be sourced with in-line citations, as it is generally assumed that the work itself is the primary source for the plot summary. However, editors are encouraged to add sourcing if possible" Thranduil (talk) 20:14, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't follow, I haven't undone your revert. There's no WP:DEADLINE, if you're saying you'll find sources, great, take all the time you need. But if you're just reverting with no intention om improving (the WP:BURDEN part of it), there's no point in discussing. You brought up Castle, which is a single character, with sources, independence of the source material. This list only has two references, primary ones.

Furthermore, this is not a plot description, they're in-universe descriptions of events that happen to the characters of American Horror Story: Freak Show. The way it is right now, it's just unnecessary. If you're saying not willing to improve the article or undo your revert, I'd be happy to take it to AfD. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 01:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes please. The onus is not on me personally to provides sources (for what, even?). If anything, it's on you to clarify what exactly is lacking sources (and needs them), and then give contributors (again, not me, personally) the chance to fix that. That's _your_ WP:BURDEN. You don't just go barging in and saying "this article is crap so I'm just gonna remove all content" without specifying what you think is crap and why you think fixing it as insurmountable task.

There's no MOS for LISTOF articles for TV shows, which is why I linked to MOS:PLOTSOURCE (also because it was the only section there referencing citation/sourcing requirements), and after going over WP:MOSTV I can't pinpoint which guidelines you believe the article, as is, doesn't adhere to.

I'm not even sure why you would take it to WP:AFD, since one of the stipulations (step B) is "If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)", which I think you skipped, Step C clearly states "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD." (which applies here) and Step D also states "If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination.", which also applies here, unless you can pinpoint specific outlandish claims that seem (to you) to be unsourceable. Thranduil (talk) 14:58, 14 June 2023 (UTC)