Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scrat (2nd nomination)

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. SNOW keep as well as explicitly withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scrat[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

I think WP:TNT applies here. The article was restored/poorly recreated. I don't think the 2 sources on its talk page passes its notability criteria either. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 11:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Comics and animation. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:27, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:28, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Current article is pretty terribly sourced, but seems notable per WP:NEXIST. Mostly due to the ongoing legal battle with a fashion designer who claims she invented Scrat. There is a massive amount of coverage here and here. There's also an article here. Ultimately she gained the trademark of "Sqrat" but may not be likely to get the rights to the actual character. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:25, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above reasoning. Not seeing the TNT grounds. Artw (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article just needs better/more sourcing. As the mascot of his animation studio, Scrat meets the notability guidelines for an article imo. --Aabicus (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, they did a farewell thing yesterday for Scrat, and it is definitely the end of the character, as he will never appear in another film anymore, with new sources now [1] [2]. So I made decision to withdraw this. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 02:44, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note for clarity: The interview says that the IP will go "into the Disney library", so while it doesn't exactly look good for the Ice Age franchise, they did not outright say anything about Scrat being retired. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The sources discussed above seem sufficient. If the nom still thinks they are not, I'd welcome reading their critique of them. Right now, this looks more like a failure of BEFORE, or to say it frankly, a lazy nomination, with nom not dedicating sufficient time to find and/or critique said sources (hence, WP:TROUT may be needed). We do appreciate efforts to clean up fancruft, Cthulhu knows we have a ton of it left, but standards should be kept high.Since the nom withdrew, the rest of my comments are not necessary --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:05, 14 April 2022 (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.