Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon references or spoofs (2nd AfD Nomination)
While i agree with Krimpet's arguement that this is one of those lists that makes people want to crusade against ''all'' pop culture lists, both RobJ1981 and Jerichi need to remember that just calling something |cruft is not an argument in itself and should be avoided at AFDs.  First, the keep: Any subject that has become so well known that it is criticized, parodied, and referenced in a wide variety of media outlets deserves a section that appropriately details some of the more high-profile or notable cases (e.g. given ''South Park's'' ratings, the "Chinpokomon" episode would be high-profile).  I could make a |point and go over to Wikipedia in popular culture and delete the two rather lengthy lists found there.  While there may be consensus for deleting the Wikipedia in popular culture#Miscellaneous|Miscellaneous section, I doubt I would get away with rming the first one which are "Landmark references."  I'm not trying to make a "two wrongs make a right" arguement, i just want to show how editors tend to say, "Well it's Pokemon, and so if it's not highly important or ref-bloated we should get rid of it."  The result is "cruft, cruft, cruft."  How to improve: If you take a close look at Otto4711's arguements you can see that this list ''could'' be improved if anyone wanted to take the time to provide the importance of said pop culture references - the Wikpedia related article justifies many of it's inclusions because they are the first examples within a specific media (of course 3 of them could be rm for not fulfilling this criterion), this list could follow suit with many of the entries
— User:Zappernapper, 16:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:CRUFT||WP:POINT (Wikipedia:Fancruft)