User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-26975268-20130201045831/@comment-188432-20130202160744

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-26975268-20130201045831/@comment-188432-20130202160744

SmallerOnTheOutside wrote: I think we're all addressing different issues. If I understood correctly, both Tangerineduel and I are addressing whether or not be should split all day pages into Day and Day (Real World), while you're still only talking about how we should definitely delete day articles with no in-universe material and move BTS of those articles only to Day (Real World). Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding this.

Reread what you've typed. Your two "options" are actually the same thing.

If we have an article that has nothing to do with the DWU, we delete it. Someone creates Bob Nobody. We delete it, because there is no such person in the DWU. We don't ask anyone. We don't hold a debate. We just do it. That's completely uncontroversial.

Dates are absolutely no different. If there is no in-universe information about 14 September, we delete it. We've long carried out this practice with respect to years. For instance, we don't have a year 7 page or a year 2689 page. It's not because these years don't logically exist within the DWU. It's because the basic tenet to the creation of any article here is that it must be mentioned (or at least explicitly shown on a calendar) in a DWU story.

With years, we've already been through the deletion of articles that were solely comprised of {{timeline}}, or the useless lead, "The year 3456 was the 56th year of the 35th century."

There is absolutely nothing controversial about deleting a day of the year page where no in-universe event is known to have occurred. If that page happens to have only production information on it, then the only way to save that information is to put it onto a page of its own.