Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DIC Entertainment productions


 * 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   Speedy Keep (non-admin closure), as per snowy consensus. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

List of DIC Entertainment productions

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

Wikipedia is not a directory. Corvus cornix talk  22:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Nominator's rational does not apply.  This is not a 1) List or repository of loosely associated topics 2) Genealogical entries or phonebook entries 3) Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business 4) Sales catalogs or price guide 5. Non-encyclopedic cross-categorization. Edward321 (talk) 22:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. Rather than a "directory", this is a list of works produced by DIC Entertainment.  Similar lists should and do exist for almost all major cartoon studios and animation producers.  Some have been formatted into a standalone list, such as List of works produced by Hanna-Barbera; some are inline, such as in Filmation.  But either way, the decision about whether to keep the list as a spinout article or merge it back to the company's page is not cause for deletion.  Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Serpent's Choice. Not much of a rationale here, and DIC Entertainment is plenty notable as an animation production company. JuJube (talk) 08:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I define a "directory" as a page that lists other websites, such as the Anime Web Turnpike. The List of DIC Entertainment productions article is exactly that: a list of the various works DIC has made over the years, with links to Wikipedia articles for the shows whenever possible. Besides, DIC's official website doesn't list all of them; there might have been some works that they forgot they made. I also don't like the idea of merging it into the main DIC article, because that would make it too long. If all the entries in the article were links to websites, THEN it would be a directory. However, like any other "list" article, each entry links to another Wikipedia article. Aside from everything else I've said, I also agree with what everyone else has said. Brittany Ka (talk) 15:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, especially considering someone has now added references to this article. --  Zanimum (talk) 15:58, 18 September 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.