Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ninjai

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ninjai[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable flash cartoon. JJ98 (Talk) 22:35, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly disagree. Notable for being among the earliest Flash cartoons, and for being produced in Flash by non-technical types — people who had regular day jobs as window washers, stuntmen, etc. Had a passionate fan base in the early 2000s, one of the earliest fan bases for a Flash cartoon. Alien9542 (talk) 12:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the page? What?! This cartoon is a) amazing and b) plenty well known, and c) would be even more well known if there had been a new episode in the last 6 years. Way back when people were going nuts waiting for new episodes to come out. You don't go making feature length movies if you don't have a large fan base do you? Keowned (talk) 01:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While there is not an enormous wealth of sourcing, the three sources I added (a borderline book reference, a Dutch newspaper article on flash games which begins with 3 paragraphs using Ninjai as an example, and a small article in Black Belt magazine), sum to reach the bar, in my view, of WP:GNG, --joe decker ^{talk to me} 15:29, 29 June 2011 (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.