Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Strawberry Shortcake fillies


 * 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 to List of Strawberry Shortcake characters. The List of Strawberry Shortcake fillies claims a close connection between each filly and each character, so there is a benefit to the reader if these articles are merged. Article_size says the 32K limit, while strongly recommended, is no longer a hard and fast rule so this should not be an obstacle to merging. Fabrictramp (talk) 14:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Strawberry Shortcake fillies

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

List of non-notable characters in the Strawberry Shortcake series. Sources aren't all that hot, and I doubt any good ones exist. I'm tempted to call this fancruft, even. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No real RS, serious notability problems.  LegoTech &middot;(t)&middot;(c) 03:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Reading this list of horses with ice cream names leads me to one conclusion; this is Strawberry Shortcruft full of OR and unsourced observations about the fanbase.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 04:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Practically only OR. asenine say what?  06:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per WP:FICT, characters are non-notable, in order for them to be notable they must have recicved real world coverage and as far as i can see they have not recicved this coverage. Printer222 (talk) 06:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CORP, as this is little more than an advertisement of merchandise that is manufactured by American Greetings, Inc., for little girls to collect. Ingenious.  Yes, you have Ginger Snap, but do you have her pony friend, Cookie Dough?  What's wrong, doesn't your Mom love you? Mandsford (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Nate. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 08:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FICT/ borderline badvertisement as above. Eusebeus (talk) 14:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The fillies cannot be fitted into the list of characters (32k limit reached) or anywhere else, and the fillies, particularly Honey Pie Pony, is integral to the series. You want proof? I can give you proof, but that will require lots of page scans from books, and screencaptures from the DVDs and computer software. RAM (talk) 14:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lists (discriminate, organized, and verfiable list concerning subject from notable franchise). WP:FICT lacks consensus as indicated on the top of the page.  "Cruft" and per so and so are not valid reasons for deletion.  Referencing concerns should be addressed per SOFIXIT.  Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 15:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The fillies are part of the series and deserve an article of their own since, as per the statement above, the character list article is already full and they do have roles throughout the series. Also, kids aren't quite as obnoxious as all that. They mix and match their toys more often than not. As per Agent0042's statement, I have fixed all the links to the characters.  Ign  —Preceding comment was added at 16:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)  — Ign st (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Merge to Strawberry Shortcake, which isn't particularly long. Stifle (talk) 20:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge - If the 32k limit allows, merge, but maybe cleaning the stuff up and keeping it will be fine. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but needs some serious work. For one thing, I'm not sure why the horses are being attached to character names with links, when those links don't link to articles about the characters, but rather just the terms that they match. That just seems dumb. Agent0042 (talk) 03:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge There's enough on this that I think we should hold off on total deletion. Personally I think most of this could be merged, such as the intro into some other article, and individual names to their related character entires, should they warrant a mention. Not to keen on keeping this article as it is now, but some of that info could easily find a home in another article. -- Ned Scott 04:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: These characters don't seem to be mentioned in any reliable, independent media, thus making them nonnotable. Graevemoore (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's a spinout article of Strawberry Shortcake. Although, you could merge it into List of Strawberry Shortcake characters if you wanted to make that list even longer. WP:CORP doesn't apply because this is not an organization. WP:NOTADVERTISING doesn't apply because this article isn't an ad. It's not OR to summarize a source. And WP:FICT isn't even a guideline. The word "fancruft" is Newspeak, nothing more. You might as well say "doubleplusungood." It's a thought-terminating cliché. --Pixelface (talk) 20:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per Graevemoore. At a stretch, trim back to that which is sourceable and merge. Jakew (talk) 13:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Grand Roi and Ign. Everyking (talk) 04:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Strawberry Shortcake characters, they would nestle in nicely there, as it is another list. Blast Ulna (talk) 06:50, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge per Blast Una et al. Bearian (talk) 13:42, 21 May 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.