Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lerche (studio)


 * 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 merge‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Studio Hibari. Daniel (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Lerche (studio)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I wouldn't describe the Lerche page as contentious, but it seems to cause confusion for the layman and editor. I believe twice now it's been changed from "Lerche (studio)" to "Lerche (brand)" or other; but nonetheless: it is not an animation studio or company, it's simply a brand name of one (namely, Studio Hibari). No source exists proving that Lerche is its own company, and Hibari's own website located here indicates that it is simply an animation brand name. A source provided on the page in a prior version I've removed, a 2014 recruitment notice, also only lists Studio Hibari and its 3D-animation subsidiary Larx Animation as companies--"Lerche" is instead given mention only as a name which certain works were produced under the name of. The about page likewise lists Hibari, LARX, Hibari Vietnam, and AZ Creative. On its own, "Lerche" is not exactly notable enough to have an entire page dedicated to it, either. Ignoring the above points, it's a list of works by Lerche that has no possible expansion as a company article; and especially given that it is a brand name, which Studio Hibari already associates to itself, I think the contents should instead be merged with its owner, Studio Hibari, much like how the Japanese Wikipedia team has handled the issue; or to use another EN Wikipedia example, the Bakken Record brand. This would largely remove unneeded confusion with the article itself, but also more concretely indicate that "Lerche" and "Hibari" are not two different companies, teams, or studios; but rather the exact same thing with different names, with brands between them distinguishable on the page itself.

I'm not sure what would be done with the associated category, but the associated template could be combined with Hibari's and simply split between the two. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 09:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2023 (UTC) Relisting comment: Is there any more support for a possible Merge? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 09:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Anime and manga and Japan.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  10:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge to Studio Hibari to match the nom's Bakken Record example. The article is just a list of works they created accompanied with an infobox and a barebones lede of the article subject's name, what it's an instance of, when it was founded and by which company, and the nom's findings show that it's not a company but instead a brand. ミラP@Miraclepine 00:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Merge to aforementioned Studio Hibari. Suitskvarts (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2023 (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.