Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crawford's Corner


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 11:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Crawford's Corner
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

User:Kelvinc is also nominating the following related pages because it was created by the same user for a subject related to the original nomination and also fails WP:V:

Ran into this article while searching on green cats (these are cats that acquired a green coat due to drinking water with a high concentration of copper, in case you're wondering). Anyways searching for Crawford's corner Perennial Pictures Film Corporation gave 177 hits, not all of them states the show in question. Searching for Crawford's Corner alone yields a lot of unrelated hits. However, that google search did turn up pages on imdb and youtube that is directly linked to the show. Judging from various other media-related Afd's, having articles on those sites do not assert enough notability. The article only have the studio's site, the show's site and a blog. --- Lenticel ( talk ) 08:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject American Animation has been informed of this ongoing discussion. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 14:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions.  -- Hiding T 18:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking this might violate a a speedy, the one on advertising. Hiding T 16:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Also nominating Crawford the Cat, made by same user. Kelvinc (talk) 09:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 13:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Very weak delete per nom. Has been broadcast, but appears to lack third-party sources.-h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 22:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to lack that lasting impact or widespread knowledge. MBisanz 10:20, 31 December 2007 (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.