Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Censorship of Regular Show in the United Kingdom


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Censorship of Regular Show in the United Kingdom

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Prodded once but template was removed with no reason given. It was prodded again but I removed it as you can't PROD an article twice. Taking to AfD for the same reasons as the initial one though, "This is completely unreferenced original research and does not pass WP:GNG".  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  00:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC) In fact, everything in and including this category should probably be deleted seperately too.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  00:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Not unusual edits at all, UK shows have regular self-edits (and even missing episodes) of American shows to meet basic content regulations, and to be clear, these are edits made locally by the network itself to meet UK standards, not made by a government agency. Not only OR, but definite fancruft, and this can easily be covered by the usual 'some episodes are edited or removed from airing for content in other markets' line in the main article. If the prods are removed on other shows in the Regular Show Censorship category, feel free to put them up here too, along with Censorship of The Amazing World of Gumball in Australia; not a source to be found among any of them (though judging from the creator having profanities in his signature this is going to be a tough nom).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC) (rationale changed to emphasize editing is self-regulation, not 'censorship' by any government agency)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 04:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 04:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 04:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per . Lacks inline citations. JJ98 (Talk) 05:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment – you may also want to see a similar discussion Articles for deletion/Censorship of Regular Show in Canada. &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:26, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete article on a non-notable subject based on original reasearch. See also Articles for deletion/Censorship of The Amazing World of Gumball in the United States.TheLongTone (talk) 09:52, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is approaching the "patent nonsense" level of a G1 speedy delete. Reading through this and other contributions by this user, we're getting into some WP:COMPETENCE territory, a rambling essay about a tv show that subs out naughty words for broadcast isn't really a notable situation. Tarc (talk) 14:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all. 100% based on original research. Firsfron of Ronchester  14:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow delete - After some searches, sources seem to be entirely unavailable to even verify information in this article. Northamerica1000(talk) 16:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete same reason as the rest of them. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  22:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete If the information is notable and sourced, it should be in the article Regular Show. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all 100% WP:OR and not notable, even if it was 100% referenced. As suggested above, it is time for some SNOW clearance. Arjayay (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Possibly it's arisen from here, but still non-notable cruft.--A bit iffy (talk) 14:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete This is NN WP:OR. In UK we have standards as to the language that can be used before a 9 pm watershed.  The article appears to be objecting to editorical changes to make the programme suitable to UK audience and UK standards.  That is not censorship, it is editing.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:57, 13 January 2013 (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.