Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demonic Toys (film series)


 * 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. North America1000 15:28, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Demonic Toys (film series)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No sources cited. Fails Notability standards  Jen yir e2  08:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  Jen yir e2  08:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article needed a complete overhaul and could still use a massive amount of work, but there are enough sources to establish notability for the series as a whole. The general rule of thumb with film series (and books) is that there should be a series article if the individual films are notable or if there's enough coverage for the combined films to justify an article. With the latter, the idea is that the series page can serve as a landing page of sorts for the individual films if any of them were to not be independently notable - thus preventing recreation of potentially non-notable or unreleased films until sourcing becomes available. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  11:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Film series is covered by multiple horror sites such as Bloody Disgusting and Dread Central, and per ReaderofthePack's rationale. Donaldd23 (talk) 12:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep -per the rationale and improvements to the article from ReaderofthePack. There are enough sources to demonstrate the series' notability, and sourced content has been added, so its just a matter of further article improvement.  Rorshacma (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Once again it needs to be pointed out that "article is bad" is not a reason for deletion.★Trekker (talk) 16:26, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep as per WP:HEY as the article has been significantly improved including multiple references showing substantial coverage in reliable sources so that WP:GNG is passed in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2021 (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.