Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jetix (US)


 * 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. Secret account 04:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Jetix (US)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

forking,notability Spshu (talk) 22:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because basically they are all content forks of Jetix and are not notable on their own and can easily have been covered in the Jetix article:
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spshu (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 March 5.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  22:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  Cameron11598  (Converse) 23:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect all to Jetix. Needless forking.  None are differentiated enough to support a dedicated article. RadioFan (talk) 01:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 *  Redirect Delete all How many times can you repeat "it was Fox Kids until the rebranding to Jetix"? Besides the few pity local shows thrown on the schedule and the American and Canadian splits, none of the national networks needs a split-off, and the American and Canadian networks are easily mentioned in the Toon Disney and Disney XD articles.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 03:28, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * ETA Whpq and Carrite make good points. RD would be a good result in 2008, but five years in the rearview after the launch of XD, nobody except the crufters are actually typing these links out. Rationale changed to delete all.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been post to talk:WikiProject Anime and manga and talk:WikiProject Disney. Spshu (talk) 14:20, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete all - Although redirects are cheap,  I don't see these disambiguated pages as needed for any ease of navigation. -- Whpq (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all - I believe Whpq makes a valid point, that none of these would be reasonably expected to be search terms. Carrite (talk) 18:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge all references in the articles to Jetix. Bad series of WP:FORK's that are not going to be looked up, however the article Jetix is lacking sources which these articles seem to have, no sense wasting good references when that is an issue at the Jetix article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I would have to disagree; looking at the majority of the refs in each article, most of them are just rehashing the Toon Disney/Jetix--->Disney XD rebrand over and over again, or are just taken straight from network PR (the big ugly orange box in the UK/I article featuring promospeak from a Jetix executive is something which is frowned on both on common sense and basic article design concerns). Better to selectively merge neutral stories rather than everything and drag the Jetix article into yet more promo junk.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed to Delete all - As the references are useless. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment: Jetix (Arab world) weas previously nominiate for deletion on 08 February 2013 with merge as a result. How should this redirect be handled? Spshu (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply - There is nothing to handle. Looking at the history, there is a notice at Talk:Jetix that a merge happened, but if you review the actual article history, no content merge was performed and all that happened was a redirect. -- Whpq (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply - My intent was to nominate all Jetix national versions for deletion. Can I add Jetix (Arab world) for deletion, or has the discussion gone on too long? Spshu (talk) 20:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply - Given that it did undergo its own AFD previously, I do not think it would be a good idea to add it here, especially as many editors have already commented. AS well, somebody would have to verify my assessment that no material was merged before the article could be deleted.  Best to nominate after this separately. -- Whpq (talk) 21:14, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I see no reason to add the Jetix (Arab World) since it this article is deleted the redirect can be tagged for speedy deletion as a G8.--64.229.164.74 (talk) 02:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Jetix (Hungary) is also a redirect to Disney Channel (Central and Eastern Europe) so that would need to be nominated separately at WP:RFD since AFD is not for deleting Redirects. Everythibg else is still an article though--64.229.164.74 (talk) 02:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Scratch my first statement, since the Jetix page itself is not under deletion then Jetix (Arab World) will need to be taken to RFD as well.--64.229.164.74 (talk) 20:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep and in some cases merge. They should definitely not be deleted, as they contain perfectly valid information. These were all different channels, launched at different times, with different schedules. Many had good viewing figures, meaning they were a notable part of the national television landscape at the time. That alone establishes notability. I don't care too much about the long lists of shows, but these articles have plenty of information about former names, launch dates, rebrand dates, time-sharing agreements, viewing figures, broadcast hours, broadcast licenses etcetera. As many of them were effectively rebranded as Disney XD around 2009, most would probably be better off merged with their respective version of that channel. Väsk (talk) 04:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TB  randley  (review) 23:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete all - No need to redirect, as we should not be in the business of providing exhaustive program directories for each channel in each country. Any relevant information from each sub article could be summarized in a table in the main article. - MrX 23:56, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all None are notable enough in themselves. If an article on the top-level is notable an editor is welcome to create one DavidTTTaylor (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all, per all the above. Cavarrone (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all. No individual notability for any of these local Jetix channels. A table at the main Jetix article should be enough. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete all, redirects aren't even useful as search terms. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been post (or reposted) at the talk pages of the following Animation, Disney and talk:WikiProject Anime and manga. Spshu (talk) 20:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete all - unneeded forking and notability issues. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:12, 19 March 2013 (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.