Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jungle King

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 then redirect to Kimba the White Lion. JERRY ^talk _contribs 03:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Jungle King[edit]

Contested prod, concern was: Non-notable film. No external reviews listed at imdb. Reason for removal was "distribution by sony would seem to be sufficient for at least a claim of notability". Even if one did make that (dubious) claim, it seems pretty clear that this film did not generate significant coverage in reliable sources, hence delete. Jfire (talk) 02:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Why? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)~~[reply]

(restoring my formatting) Is it not clear enough from the prod concern and nomination? OK then, fails WP:N and WP:NF. Jfire (talk)

Oops, my bad. I just saw a plain "delete" with a sig, and thought that it was someone else's !vote, I didn't realize it was your "as nom" !vote. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 02:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Should the result of this AfD be delete, can we redirect this to Kimba the White Lion as this is an oft confused translation of the anime Kimba originated from, confused more by the fact that some say The Lion King was plagiarized from it? Redfarmer (talk) 02:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- Hiding T 12:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and then Redirect per Redfarmer. Hiding T 12:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The film lacks sufficient notability for its own article. There is some indication above that a redirect could be in order. --Stormbay (talk) 23:34, 16 January 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.