Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 26: Line 26:
</noinclude>
</noinclude>
<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
<!-- New AFDs should be placed on top of the list, directly below this line -->
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studios Hergé}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Beezer Book}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Beezer Book}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sanket_Mhatre_(voice_actor)}}
{{Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sanket_Mhatre_(voice_actor)}}

Revision as of 10:27, 17 April 2024

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Comics and animation. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Comics and animation|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Comics and animation.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Article alerts are available, updated by AAlertBot. More information...


Scan for comics AfDs

Scan for animation AfDs
Scan for webcomics AfDs
Scan for comics Prods
Scan for animation Prods
Scan for webcomics Prods
Scan for comics template TfDs
Scan for animated series template TfDs

Related deletion sorting

Comics and animation

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 (tc) 11:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Studios Hergé

Studios Hergé (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail notability. While the namesake of the studios, Hergé, is undoubtedly notable, I don't see how these studios are. When I conducted a WP:BEFORE search, most of the sources were about Hergé and not the studios themselves, and/or do not have WP:SIGCOV of the studios. The article has been tagged as requiring additional sources since 2014, and most of the sourcing is unverifiable (the two book citations do not have a page number, or ISBN, making the claim violate WP:PAGENUM, and the other is an interview with a link to an insecure website). As an WP:ATD, I'd be fine with a redirect to the Hergé Foundation, which appears to be notable, since the Foundation is the successor to the studios. Bandit Heeler (talk) 10:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation, Organizations, and Belgium. Bandit Heeler (talk) 10:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, plenty of sources giving attention to the studios, their role in the creation of the later Tintin stories, the many famous artists who worked here (most famously Bob de Moor, Jacques Martin and Roger Leloup probably, what happened to it after Hergés death, ... Plenty of reliable and indepth information from even English-language sources like this book (note, one or two of the pages listed are about the older advertising Studio Hergé had on the thirties, not the actual Studios Hergé, but most are about this one), this book, this one, ... And plenty more in French language books like this one discussing the Studios at length. Fram (talk) 10:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I would object to a redirection, because while technically the Foundation is the successor, their role was completely different: the Studios were a creative groupn making new comics and new drawings (for ads and so on), while the Foundation was an exploitative group, reusing existing images for new uses (e.g. clothing) but not creating things. Fram (talk) 10:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch 10:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Notability has been demonstrated now. The French article also has some additional sources. Cortador (talk) 12:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Both Hergé, Son of Tintin and The Real Hergé: The Inspiration Behind Tintin (linked by Fram above) offer significant coverage that demonstrates notability. Toughpigs (talk) 17:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No notability problem whatsoever. Also the length of the article is sufficient. The article does need more inline references, already covered by a warning. Nomination is a clear NEXIST failure. AFDISNOTCLEANUP and SNOW apply. gidonb (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The studios have received sufficient sig coverage throughout their run. X (talk) 09:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to The Beezer. Liz Read! Talk! 01:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Beezer Book

The Beezer Book (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing found which suggests there is independent notability to the inclusion standards beyond The Beezer, not clear this content could be supported fully with references per WP:V even if it was to be merged. WP:NOTEVERYTHING JMWt (talk) 07:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to The Beezer. These are common finds in secondhand bookshops in the UK. Have briefly searched for sources for WP:V but found nothing. Orange sticker (talk) 11:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. It could be redirected to The Beezer per ATD. Desertarun (talk) 09:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Beezer as no standalone sig coverage of the topic. X (talk) 16:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎ and WP:SALT as a title-gaming recreation of a previously salted page. Any editor proficient with regex is welcome to add the title to our blacklist. Owen× 14:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sanket Mhatre (voice actor)

Sanket Mhatre (voice actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article was previously deleted and salted at Sanket Mhatre/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanket Mhatre and was recreated by a sock. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Our subject does not meet the notability criteria set down by WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST.
Forensics on sources: We have an extensive list of voice actors, which name-drops our subject; this article about something else, titled "How dubbed versions of Hollywood hits are churning out heroes," in which, again, the name of our subject is mentioned; a promotional piece on a commercial website that uses our subject in its video games; a couple of interviews, here and there, which, per se, do not support notability; more irrelevancies, such as this; and so on. The fact that the article has been created by an account indefinitely blocked for using multiple odious socks does not help. -The Gnome (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 05:40, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hemmo Paskiainen

Hemmo Paskiainen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article cites no sources, and I was unable to find significant coverage, only brief mentions. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Pahkasika. toweli (talk) 12:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mahabharat (animated TV series)

Mahabharat (animated TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of notability under SNG or GNG. Series that is only on YouTube and and a streaming service. Not only does it not have GNG sources, it really has zero sources. Of the two references, one is to it's sales page and the other is a link to one of it's youtube videos. North8000 (talk) 18:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is any support for Draftification which is what the creator seems to want. Their participation here would be welcome.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. Liz Read! Talk! 00:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catch! Teenieping

Catch! Teenieping (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page use many invaild sources. When you click on a page, there are also invalid pages. Guidelines have not been significantly addressed in reliable secondary sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability Hkm5420 (talk) 05:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The secondary sources for the show seems to be mainly available on the South Korean news websites. Here. --린눈라단 (talk) 19:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from this, we need to fill in secondary sources of the article. --린눈라단 (talk) 20:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Added a couple of things. Various sources attest of the notability of this series, including some in English (The Korea Herald, among other). The page needs trimming and probably some cuts and removal of some primary sources that are perhaps unnecessary but notability and popularity seem established. Not sure there is a valid reason for deletion in the nominator's rationale: Afds are for deletion not cleanup. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Mushy Yank's improvements. The Korea Herald article is strong, and the Busan.com article is good as well. There's enough here to indicate notability. Toughpigs (talk) 16:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - I can see some coverage on the subject. I would like to add The Korea Herald, JoongAng Daily etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkkingg (talkcontribs) 11:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect‎ to Crumb family which has been restored to this version per consensus. If material is to be merged, the history is there. Star Mississippi 03:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Crumb

Charles Crumb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BLP. Notable primarily due to his familiel association with Robert Crumb. Schierbecker (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This page can not be Merged or Redirect to Crumb family as this page is a Redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think the proposal is to create a new article. It's not a bad idea. Schierbecker (talk) 23:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct; see the discussion I linked above. And the person who closes the AfD does not need to be the person who turns Crumb family into an article -- they can add {{Afd-merge to}} to Charles Crumb and let the community implement the decision. Jfire (talk) 23:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see. Well, there has to be an existing article to Merge/Redirect to when this discussion gets closed as far as I know. I might leave this discussion for another closer. Liz Read! Talk! 01:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Liz, the AFD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crumb_family turned a valid listicle into a (bad) redirect. The previous version at [3] could be restored. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 02:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is a new consensus to revert the action of the 2009 AFD that turned this article into a Redirect to go back to this edit.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Comics and animation proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

Templates for discussion