Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giant Woman


 * 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   no consensus. (WP:NPASR). (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 04:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Giant Woman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I am the article creator; while others have complemented the presentation at a merger proposal, I think this fails the general notability guideline, as only one independent third-party source discusses it at length, and as of today that's all I can find. It is mostly reliant on primary or first-party sources, with brief mentions elsewhere. I'd make it a redirect, but I don't know the proper avenues for gaining broader consensus as the merger proposal tag was removed from its target page, stating "clear opposition exists". 23W 20:51, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 July 26.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 21:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook  23:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NickGibson3900 - Talk - Sign my Guestbook  23:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep, multiple sources in article. Coverage is about on par with other cartoon episodes. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * All the coverage except one ref comes from a Tumblr page, which could be hardly considered a reliable source. Nominator seems to have a point. Cavarrone 17:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  19:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:06, 11 August 2014 (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.