Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disney Special Editions
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 delete. --BDD (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disney Special Editions[edit]
- Disney Special Editions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Despite previously having been a regular editor of this page, I'm increasingly starting to think that the article is not notable per WP:DIRECTORY. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Nominator has correct reasoning that WP:DIRECTORY is definitely what this article is. Additionally, regular release of catalog releases under a fancy banner isn't something notable, not withstanding Disney's branding and the Disney Vault 'legend'. Nate • (chatter) 00:14, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Considering that this is about products of the unarguably notable Disney Corporation, one wonders if the numerous independent sources which speak toward the topic of "Disney Special Editions" might be used to source the article and show enough notability so that this might be worth keeping under WP:LISTPURP and WP:SALAT. Miami Herald Cinemblend Muso's Guide DVD Talk London Free Press Big Cartoon Database IGN Coming Soon etc. Just wondering. Schmidt, Michael Q. 06:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Michael - Some of those references are not for UK editions (which is supposedly the focus of the page) but for the US editions, which are covered at Walt Disney Platinum and Diamond Editions. One of them is a forum hoax also. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- So, the US versions of Disney Specials are notable but the UK are not. We might hope that UK Disney aficionados might offer UK coverage to match notability of the US equivalents. If not, que sera sera Schmidt, Michael Q..
- Hi Michael - Some of those references are not for UK editions (which is supposedly the focus of the page) but for the US editions, which are covered at Walt Disney Platinum and Diamond Editions. One of them is a forum hoax also. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- I think the concept of "Platinum" and "Diamond" editions may be worthy of inclusion - this is just an extension of that concept which amounts to little more than a UK release WP:CATALOG. As I said, I've edited it myself in the past, but have always considered it a borderline case - as time goes on, it seems less reliable and encyclopedic. "Special Edition" doesn't really mean much these days. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough... and I am even less invested than you. If the British want it they can come up with sourcing. Cheers, Schmidt, Michael Q. 17:14, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the concept of "Platinum" and "Diamond" editions may be worthy of inclusion - this is just an extension of that concept which amounts to little more than a UK release WP:CATALOG. As I said, I've edited it myself in the past, but have always considered it a borderline case - as time goes on, it seems less reliable and encyclopedic. "Special Edition" doesn't really mean much these days. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:05, 19 September 2013 (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.