Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bad Dog!


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) MaxnaCarter (talk) 03:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Bad Dog!

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable show, minimal sourcing found. Deprodded with rationale of "notable show" but no proof of supposed notability Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete we do not have enough sourcing to show that this show was notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The review notes: "But in a new series, “Bad Dog!,” the folks at Animal Planet, no doubt after conducting extensive research and war-game simulations, seem to have concluded that the battle against growling, biting, territory marking, furniture ripping and garden-bed digging is unwinnable. The show presents assorted dogs that are expanding the boundaries of bad canine behavior, then does nothing to correct the beasts. Instead, it seems to revel in their wickedness. ... As revealing as the show is about the extent of the dogs-gone-wrong epidemic, it also tells us something about the people who own these animals. In several instances the doggie depravity is captured on video because the owners have set up surveillance cameras."  The review provides 114 words of coverage about the subject. The review notes: "Where most shows starring misbehaving pets strive to reform them, “Bad Dogs” is all about reveling in their mischief. There’s no Dog Whisperer in sight. As guilty pleasures go, this one is a winner."  The review provides 97 words of coverage about the subject. The review notes: "Well, I can't say I approve of cats being included in a bad dog marathon (or ferrets, or hedgehogs for that matter - although I forgive the goats because they're so adorable). Elsewhere though, this is a fun, silly compilation of dogs behaving badly, rather in the style of Funniest Home Videos, only with hounds instead of toddlers, and complete with arch narration and kooky sound effects. To anyone who owns a dog, much of the behaviour here will seem unremarkable, but there are some wonderful moments. I liked the commando border collie, and the amazing peeing Pomeranian." Less significant coverage:  The article notes: "Bad Dog! (8pm, Animal Planet) - The new season of “Bad Dog!” begins with a dog that keeps escaping from a backyard and another who drops to the ground during walks. Yet another dog is obsessed with his owners’ toaster oven."  The article provides 78 words of coverage about the subject. The article notes: "You'd have to be quite the dog lover to take much satisfaction from this marathon (has 60 minutes ever seemed so long?) of cutie-pie hounds stuffing up. Bad Dog Marathon is a bit like Funniest Home Videos stuck in the groove of the misbehaving pet. "How could you stay mad at that face for very long?" squeaks the high-pitched male narrator as some mutt tries hard to maintain the hang-dog expression it obviously has been trained to wear."</li> </ol></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Bad Dog! to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 09:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * Keep per Cunard's rationale as above. ☆★  Mamushir   ( ✉✉ ) 10:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Cunard's come through again. The sources, especially #1 above, show WP:SIGCOV in independent rs, passes WP:GNG. Jacona (talk) 12:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per the citations listed by Cunard. Donald D23   talk to me  17:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per Cunard above. Carrite (talk) 21:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep the article is referenced now. It is in better shape than when it was nominated. Bruxton (talk) 03:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)