Talk:Glitch Productions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

untitled[edit]

This article talks about a production company that produced an animated series on YouTube called Meta Runner. People most know who produced the show in the first place. If you delete this, people are not going to know who the Production Company is, and therefore, could lead to confusion for new Wikipedia users that might not have heard of this company.

Contested deletion[edit]

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because this article is about a production company behind an animated series on YouTube called Meta Runner. People want to do their research on this specific company for a documentary, a video, etc. If you delete this article, you might create confusion for many researchers, especially for new users who don't know anything about this company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamsesTimeGame (talk • contribs) 01:46, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you prove that this article is notable? Roostery123 (talk) 07:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you look up Meta Runner on this site, you can see who the production companies are. The company you are looking for is called Glitch Productions. It may redirect you to GLITCH, but the article has sources in there that can make it notable. RamsesTimeGame (talk) 14:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GLITCH to Glitch Productions.[edit]

What do you think? Should this article be renamed from GLITCH to Glitch Productions? Leave your responses in the replies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RamsesTimeGame (talk • contribs) 00:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should the article be GLITCH or Glitch Productions? RamsesTimeGame (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Glitch Productions is what they have on their website. The article also starts with "Glitch Productions..." so naming the article "GLITCH" is kind of awkward. --Roostery123 (talk) 05:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So should we change it? There is a redirect, so, we can go to the redirect and move the entire article to that redirect and remove that redirect. RamsesTimeGame (talk) 07:47, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article should be turned into redirect to Glitch(disambiguation) when the article is moved to Glitch Productions. Roostery123 (talk) 01:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Turn into article[edit]

Glitch has created three very popular shows with Wikipedia articles, and even have a template on this site dedicated to them. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't have an article. Cereally8 (talk) 08:03, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Former logo"?[edit]

As far as I'm aware, they're still using the logo referred to as the former logo. Why was it changed? Cereally8 (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see now. (Honestly, the new logo looks way worse but this isn't the place to talk about that) Cereally8 (talk) 08:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Narutolovehinata5 talk 11:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Cereally8 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Glitch Productions; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Sadly, the article doesn't qualify as "new", per my understanding of the guidelines. The original article was not deleted for copyright violation reasons (though a much larger version of it was cut down for that reason sometime previous to the AfD that resulted in the deletion). The degree of expansion is too small to count as 5x, per the character counter I used. If another reviewer disagrees with either element of my assessment before this is yanked from the nomination page, please ping me—the transition to the new guidelines has left me a little confused on a couple points. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Retarded 64 and Super Mario 64 Bloopers=[edit]

Isn't Retarded 64 and Super Mario 64 Bloopers 2 different series? They were both discontinued in favor of the much larger SMG4 series.

Louis Campfield (talk) 00:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both were part of the SMG4 brand and were discontinued prior to the introduction of Glitch Productions - K-popguardian (talk) 09:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But then should we have a separate article for the SMG4 series, because originally, SMG4 was founded before the creation of GLITCH. Plus, SMG4 is basically a different entity. They have different YouTube channels, and have much different content. Plus, people have been fighting over the creation for a seperate article for Glitch Productions on Wikitubia, as SMG4 and Glitch have much different content. Louis Campfield (talk) 02:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been noted in the past that SMG4 has the notability for an article but no one has known how to approach it for a while. - K-popguardian (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"has the notability for an article" name a single reliable source that has made an article about smg4
jouranlists shouldnt dictate notablility but it's how wikipedia works Cereally8 (talk) 10:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glitch_Productions&oldid=1216544419"