This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I don't agree with the proposed deletion of this article (obviously, since I thought the article was worth writing); not everything that's notable and has received discussion in independent sources is just a feature of the character Stevonnie. The fact that the entire episode is a narrative about consent, which has received discussion in multiple independent sources, is a fact about the episode, not about Stevonnie specifically. AJD (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I added some of the information from the AlterNet source to the article on Stevonnie yesterday. I think the fact that this episode deals with consent in such a way is interesting and I am glad that it has a place on Wikipedia, but I think it can be covered just as fully in the article Stevonnie. You could argue that a large percentage of the article about Stevonnie is actually about their introduction and how it was handled. Is there any reliably sourced information in this article that isn't directly related to Stevonnie? (besides the viewership record, I suppose) ~Mable (chat) 10:57, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some information about the episode's art design from the Steven Universe art book. I also really think the fact that the episode is about consent is an interesting thing about this episode that's not just a fact about Stevonnie; it's depends at least as much on Kevin, and I've highlighted that in the quote from Rebecca Sugar that I've paraphrased. AJD (talk) 07:13, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The artbook is not considered a source that helps to establish notability, because it's a primary source. I'd also argue that Kevin is fairly strongly linked to Stevonnie throughout the series. This all being said, you are allowed to remove the "Proposed Deletion" template from an article whenever you want (This is different from an "Article for Deletion"). I'll just call the relevant WikiProjects and start a larger discussion, because I don't think the two of us will come to a consensus alone together. (pardon the pun) ~Mable (chat) 10:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay but like... what establishes notability is the several other independent secondary sources that discuss the episode and its themes, including but not restricted to the role of the character of Stevonnie in the episode. Although "Alone Together" wasn't reviewed by major sources like the AV Club the way later episodes were, this episode is discussed much more in scholarly research on the show than something like "Super Watermelon Island" or "Off Colors" is. I think I am gonna delete the template, and you can start a larger discussion if you choose. AJD (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
