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:
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.
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:
No sources at all, lacks notability, extreme amounts of fluff - looks very much like just a self-promo page.
Hornpipe2 (
talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(comment) having some doubts over whether the IPv6 editor, and also the user "rickory", have a conflict of interest going on with this
Hornpipe2 (
talk) 06:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Could find no sources to establish notability.
Esw01407 (
talk) 16:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. As always, the notability test for actors and actresses is not automatically passed just by listing roles, and requires the provision of
WP:GNG-worthy
reliable source coverage about her and her roles, but none is present here and I've had about as much luck as the above commenters at finding anything better.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Ok look, there's been a bunch of back and forth on this article, including the previous nomination being overturned from keep to no consensus. I've done some digging on the subject, and here's my conclusions:
1. This individual has not won a Guinness World Record. This appears to be a miscited claim from them saying they had submitted a world record attempt for "fastest created movie" for creating a 3 minute animated movie in 10 hours. This attempt was not recorded by the Guinness Book of World Records. In the
previous nomination, it was commented by several keep voters that the 3rd source in this article is from a reliable source. Given that they have printed this very simply false claim in the second sentence, I propose it be disregarded.
3.
WP:NEWSORGINDIA was not mentioned in the previous nomination, but I would like to comment that I think it makes this specific claim of notability extra dubious.
No ill will here, she seems like a smart woman making a good way in the world, but this marketing stunt is her *only* source of notability. It seems like it will be very difficult to write an encyclopaedic article about her because the only sources covering her are local puff pieces about how great she is. BrigadierG (
talk) 22:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: We literally just closed this less than 3 weeks ago. Let it rest for a bit. There is nothing that's changed in a month. Any "untruths" lets call them (as mentioned above), can be removed from the article by edit, not be deletion.
Oaktree b (
talk) 00:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion closed as no consensus which doesn't hold prejudice to renomination. Given that the most recent coverage for this individual is from 7 years ago or so, I don't think much is going to change about their notability status. At best, waiting stirs the voter pool a bit. BrigadierG (
talk) 17:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE shows that most of the sources were from the film, except this
[1]. But, that is not enough for the character. 🥒
Greenish Pickle!🥒 (
🔔) 04:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I initially
WP:PRODed this article with the following rationale: "Non-notable fictional character. None of the current references are reliable, secondary sources. Searches just turned up very trivial mentions - no significant coverage in reliable sources." It was later de-prodded, with the suggestion that a full discussion should be held due to the subject being a pre-internet subject, so I am bringing it to AFD. To give further details on my
WP:BEFORE results, the only results I was able to find in actual reliable sources were extremely brief, usually just a sentence or two stating "An early example of this kind of character was Night Hawk" and that's about it, such as
thesetwo books.
Rorshacma (
talk) 19:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
A redirect/merge to the
The Nelson Lee Library seems more sensible than deletion. I'm assuming you've checked the physical media covering British story papers, like Book & Magazine Collector, Boys Will Be Boys, etc., etc. rather than just using Google.
BoomboxTestarossa (
talk) 21:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Couldn't find
WP:SIGCOV. Would support a redirect if people can agree on a valid target. But it's an unlikely search term and deletion is also fine.
Shooterwalker (
talk) 01:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge and redirect to
The Nelson Lee Library, agreeing with
BoomboxTestarossa. We do have the mentioned secondary sources, which should count for something, but does not seem enough to be to establish stand-alone notability (I cannot see The British Superhero, p. 41, myself). So merge as
WP:AtD.
Daranios (
talk)
Non-notable actor whose career has been a string of tiny roles and insignificant voice acting gigs. Fails
WP:BIO.
Capt. Milokan (
talk) 21:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 23:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Reviewed during NPP. This is basically a catalog of a particular company's products. AFD nomination per no GNG sourcing of the topic per se and numerous wp:not issues. North8000 (
talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
CommentBoBoiBoy seems to cover this. The template for it can be edited to add in the few things missing.
DreamFocus 17:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: This is not a catalog of a particular company's products and I have added more sources.
Someonewhoisusinginternet (
talk) 08:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The last entry in the now-depopulated
Category:The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle and Friends episodes (other episodes and story arcs proved to be non-notable and got redirected after prods and AfDs). This one, being the first story arc, is... well, longer than many others but still does not show why it is notable. We have a gigantic plot summary with poor references and my BEFORE fails to find much of use. I suggest redirecting this one as well. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus|
reply here 06:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Desertarun (
talk) 16:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Appears to be OR. I can't find much of anything for sourcing, but this much info had to come from somewhere, so I'm lost for how it got so much detail. Regardless, no sourcing is no sourcing and a delete.
Oaktree b (
talk) 20:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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:NOTEVERYTHINGJMWt (
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, LizRead!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