Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cool Cat Saves the Kids


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. I'm closing this early primarily for one reason: that the article appears to be an attack page against Savage for his actions concerning video reviews. However notability is also an issue here (enough to where I don't think that this would close any other way) since a search brings up only two sources: a Dove review and a Vox article about the film trailer. These are not enough to establish notability for the film, especially given the main issue of it being used as a coatrack. Despite having two notable performers in the cast, it seems to have been almost solidly ignored by the media. If anyone can bring up any good sources to show that this would pass notability guidelines I'm willing to restore the article with the controversy section removed, but only if the sources are particularly strong - this looks like it'd be a potential vandalism and trolling nightmare. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:38, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Cool Cat Saves the Kids

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable film, the only notability is tangentially related to this film, and there a little to no sources about it. Does not meet WP:NF BOVINEBOY 2008 15:17, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete A good catch, imo. No reliable sources about the film -- the only review I see is the blacklisted Examiner -- and it almost reads as a WP:COAT attack article on Savage, the videomaker? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. The only review of any length that I found was at the Examiner, presumably the same one that Shawn in Montreal found.  There's a brief review at Dove Foundation, and Vox ran a short so-bad-it's-good review of the trailer. However, I found nothing like in-depth coverage by independent reliable sources.
 * For what it's worth, at this writing the video is ranked #14,797 in Movies and TV at Amazon. I'm not sure how this translates into units sold, but it certainly doesn't suggest a high degree of market penetration. — Ammodramus (talk) 17:21, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment (Non-Focusing on that page). Ok, I Just telling you that Know Your Meme website already classifed the movie as "Ironic Meme"? And for now this page will revived without Controversy section due IHE youtuber automatically won by New Youtube copyright system.2606:A000:85C0:E00:24AA:C4C4:C824:BF6D (talk) 20:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC) implanted
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not have significant coverage in reliable sources.  Maybe some day it will become a notable meme, but right now it looks like it's just glorified YouTube drama. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:58, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: I may shut this down a little early because it looks like the controversy section was written to take a swipe at Savage. This is already covered at KYM, who doesn't have to prove notability like we do, just that it exists. The Vox review is coming up as a dead link, but I did find this article by them about the film's trailer, and that's about it. In any case, given that the controversy section could be seen as someone using the article as a sandbox over Savage's actions (which bring in some BLP concerns even though it's not a bio), I think that it may just be easier to give this a swift end. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:25, 29 November 2015 (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.