Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miracle Dogs Too

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, per consensus, and per author request (see last post here). Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miracle Dogs Too

This is an unnotable made for television film sequel that does not meet any of the film notability guidelines. It has not received significant coverage anywhere, has not been widely distributed, has not received two full reviews from nationally known critics, has not received any awards, etc. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. —-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete this article and my other articles also. From now on, I will be sure not to post articles that aren't notable and I will reword articles. I was not trying to be a trouble maker. Schuym1 (talk) 00:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)schuym1[reply]

Please don't take this personally. this is not at all meant to be an attack on your or on the contributions you have made to the encyclopedia. Unfortunately we have guidelines as to what may or may not be kept as an article. Sometimes that leads to articles that people have worked on and put a great deal of effort in being deleted. This is not a sign that the work invested in those articles is valueless. It is just a result of a community decision to limit wikipedia to articles which are Notable and make Verifiable claims supported by Reliable Sources. Make sure to keep it on an even keel and there basically are no other rules. :) Protonk (talk) 03:59, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Does this count as notable?: Miracle Dog: How Quentin Survived the Gas Chamber to Speak for Animals on Death RowSchuym1 (talk) 05:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)schuym1[reply]
  - the sourcing should include at least one of the television appearances. the guide to editing has instructions on how to source television shows. The book reference (second ref) should also reference the book more directly (in author-date form), rather than link to a page about the book. but the subject of the article appears to be covered in significant detail in an independent, reliable source. Seems fine to me. Protonk (talk) 05:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to Miracle Dogs. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added a csd-g7 to Miracle Dogs (It's not notable, so merging Miracle Dogs Too with Miracle Dog is not a good idea) Deleting Miracle Dogs Too is a better idea. Schuym1 (talk) 05:35, 30 June 2008 (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.