Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Chickadees
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. The Placebo Effect (talk) 17:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The Chickadees (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This article asserts no notability through reliable independent sources, and as such is just an in-universe repetition of plot elements from the Scrooge McDuck comicbook articles. As such, this is all duplicative, this can be safely deleted. Judgesurreal777 04:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Per the nom's reason; Not notable. - Rjd0060 04:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
•Keep – 19,100 hits on Google as noted here [1] with a very explicate search criteria, makes a pretty impressive KEEP argument. Shoessss | Chat 14:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per above. Twenty Years 15:47, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Being a google search isn't a wikipedia guideline and has nothing to do with this discussion. It does not establish this has any reliable sources, or that it has any critical commentary on the subject. Judgesurreal777 16:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree on your reasoning. On one hand you are right; "...google search isn't a wikipedia guideline." However, I take it you did not go to the link I provided? The link provides several; "... reliable sources, ……and commentary on the subject.” Secondly, this is not the page to list those sources rather a discussion or whether or not to keep an article based on the editors Informed opinion not just opinion.Shoessss | Chat 17:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As it is the job of the keepers to demonstrate notability, please post some of those reliable sources here so we can all see them. Judgesurreal777 18:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that is for the actual article's page. This page is to discuss whether the article is to be kept or not and give his/hers reasoning for a Keep or Delete opinion. In stating a Keep or Delete opinion, the editor “Should” be informed and state his/her reasoning. I believe in my Keep Opinion, I listed my reasoning and provided the source for forming my opinion, as I list once again here [2]. Hence an “Informed” opinion. In addition, the articial does meet WP:NOTE Shoessss | Chat 20:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As the nomination asks for notability, it must be proven, otherwise it should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 22:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As it is the job of the keepers to demonstrate notability, please post some of those reliable sources here so we can all see them. Judgesurreal777 18:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree on your reasoning. On one hand you are right; "...google search isn't a wikipedia guideline." However, I take it you did not go to the link I provided? The link provides several; "... reliable sources, ……and commentary on the subject.” Secondly, this is not the page to list those sources rather a discussion or whether or not to keep an article based on the editors Informed opinion not just opinion.Shoessss | Chat 17:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Being a google search isn't a wikipedia guideline and has nothing to do with this discussion. It does not establish this has any reliable sources, or that it has any critical commentary on the subject. Judgesurreal777 16:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions. -- Hiding T 17:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. Scanning through the first pages of the 1,000's of Ghits, I see several possible good cites to prove some notability outside the world of Disney. It's not my thing, so another person will have to mop up this one. Bearian (talk) 17:43, 12 December 2007 (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.