Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Absent Mothers in Disney films


 * 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 redirect to Disney Mothers. As this article duplicates the article in this AfD, I am closing them together - please see the AfD for the rationale behind not deleting the article. This side of things has more !votes to redirect, and seems to be a more sensible title since the article also includes information about TV series, and so it's the one to be redirected. If you feel this should be the main title, fight it over on the article's talk page. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Absent Mothers in Disney films

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable list, fancruft, tinge of OR ukexpat (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The intro is pretty much WP:OR, and the list itself isn't anything useful to compile. Delete for OR issues and a lack of good sources in the intro.  --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 00:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * KEEP: I know this subject is discussed in many classroom settings and it is a topic of many scholastic reports. I think there should be a comprehensive list to help people begin their research. MercyLewis (talk) 00:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding comment added by MercyLewis (talk • contribs) 00:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research/synthesis; the one source at the bottom may be worth saving, though. See related discussion here. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 00:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Le Grand Roi de Ican'tspellthatlastword seems to know what he's doing. I say that the subject is indeed verifiable and can be improved; however, either this needs a merge to Disney Mothers or vice versa. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 21:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:OR or at least WP:SYNTH. JJL (talk) 01:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Disney Mothers (if it's kept - delete if it's not). If there are more sources like this it might well be possible to write a reliably sourced, verifiable article around the topic. Guest9999 (talk) 02:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete  Grsz  ' 11 ' 03:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:OR, WP:SYNTH. Redfarmer (talk) 09:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  11:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  11:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. This page would appear to be a substantial duplicate of Disney Mothers, which was also up for AfD, and which I voted to keep.  I prefer this title. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or redirect without deleting to Disney mothers per my reasoning in that AfD, i.e. that the topic is not original research when the topic is already covered in reliable secondary sources, such as Geoff Shearer, "Disney keeps killing movie mothers: DISNEY is continuing its tradition of being G-rated entertainment's biggest mother flickers," Courier Mail (March 07, 2008); Ashli Ann Sharp, Once Upon a Time in a Single-parent Family: Father and Daughter Relationships in Disney's The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast (Brigham Young University, 2006); Aisha Sultan, "What does Disney have against mothers?," ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH (03/15/2008); etc. Plus, we should give the article a chance as the article is only a couple of days old.  There is no deadline on Wikipedia and the article has already improved since its original version on the 17th of March 2008 versus its current version.  If at least three or more reliable, scholarly secondary sources were found in just two days, and the lead written in a prose fashion, I think the article clearly has realistic potential and should be given more than two days to expand further.  Also, per our First pillar, articles on Disney characters are consistent with over thirty published specialized encyclopedias.  Finally, various types of women and how they're depicted in Disney films have been the subject of book length studies published by University presses, such as this example.  Sincerely, --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 17:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep and here I was sure I was going to vote delete with extreme prejudice when I saw the article title... It seems that multiple reliable sources have made a similar observation, and as such an article on the topic might be both notable and encyclopedic.  I would rather see a less list-y article, and more of sort of a discussion of the phenomenon, well-cited of course to avoid any WP:OR or WP:SYNTH problems.  Also, maybe this should be merged into some other article, though I'm not sure what it would be... maybe something about Critical analysis of Disney films or something of the sort.  In any case, the idea does not appear to be WP:OR, although the lists at the end feel a bit cruft-y to me. --Jaysweet (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep does need some expansion other than listing of films, but is sourced & easily expandable w/good sources. SkierRMH  ( talk ) 18:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or maybe merge to Disney Mothers, which is also on AfD. This is a notable pop-culture subject and that's what Wikipedia's good at.--T. Anthony (talk) 11:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.