Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fried Dynamite


 * 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 all. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Cartoon Network programming block articles

 * ( [ delete] ) – :(View AfD) (View log)

These articles don't really have a purpose but to act as programming guides and are cannot be sourced reliably as the schedules they detail change regularly and Cartoon Network doesn't publish a static schedule in order to verify the content. There's little chance any are bit notable enough to warrant separate articles, they fail on WP:NOT, WP:N and WP:V. treelo radda  10:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   — treelo  radda  10:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete all no merge, no redirect. These are programming guides. WP:NOTDIRECTORY, point 3 states that articles should not contain lists of these nature. A stipulation is historically significant, which does not apply here. These are standard programming blocks which come and go, and there's no real significance for this information. The information is ultimately not verifiable, as Cartoon Network doesn't maintain an archive of programming, and any second-party sources would be stuff like tv.com and tvguide.com, which are generally rated as unreliable sources. Yngvarr (t) (c) 11:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all, Wikipedia is not a TV guide. Stifle (talk) 11:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Shnitzel Treelo, programming guides, TV cruft. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 12:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge em all. There are likely plenty of sources for each one, but editorially they make sense as a single unit.  I only looked for sources on the first one and found,  (looks like a PR but the site claims copyright) ,  (article on Variety which mentions the host of FD is 10 years old)  behind paywall but includes more about the host and show.  That's just for one of these.  As a group, WP:N shouldn't be an issue as this one meets the letter of WP:N by itself. Hobit (talk) 12:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd like to challenge these sources. They are almost, but not quite entirely, unlike tea trivial mentions. The first one is a ratings report for a specific show which just happens to air during one of these programming blocks. On the second one, two of the four paragraphs are devoted to programming details. The third one is almost trivial, but of the actual information, there isn't really enough to satisfy multiple non-trivial mentions. Yngvarr (t) (c) 20:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have a more generous view of them, but even if these are fairly weak, this is only for one of the above. I'm proposing to merge them all into one article.  If they each have that kind of coverage (and a quick look indicated they do) then as a combined article WP:N should be met.  You agree? Hobit (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Cartoon Network or Merge all per Hobit SNS (talk) 16:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete We aren't a programming guide. News or web mentions of these items are likely to be "blah show on XYZ programming block...", made mostly because the PR people at CN are paid to hassle guide writers to include that stuff.  No reason for us to give free advertising to CN. Protonk (talk) 16:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Not that it's a great source, but do look at . It goes into more detail than that for certain.  Again, between all of these WP:N doesn't have a problem.  Hobit (talk) 17:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with that assessment of that diff. I see that the source notes the creation of this programming block and then notes what shows are on it.  It is no Adult Swim (although that article is poorly sourced). Protonk (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm unsure why you are referring to that link as a diff (typo? some common term I'm clueless about?).  As you note, it discusses the creation and what shows are on.  But it also spends 1.5 paragraphs describing the host (a 10-year old) and how he's being presented.  Seems like a solid (if only 4 paragraph) RS.  Hobit (talk) 14:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete all except Miguzi which should probably be merged to Toonami as it was (IIRC) a spinoff aimed at a younger demographic. JuJube (talk) 03:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Of course sources exist, but they do not change the fact that WP is not a TV guide. I could check 5 TV guides and verify these, but it is still not encylopedic.Yobmod (talk) 11:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I believe that all the articles except Fridays and Toonami should be deleted. Like what I did for Cartoon Network's wedgies, it is insignificantt.Bgnkid (talk) 00:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC) This comment was moved from Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Fried Dynamite as a courtesy. treelo  radda  10:12, 9 October 2008 (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.