Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Weebl and Bob cartoons


 * 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 of the debate was KEEP, although the debate appears to move on towards the end: this is a set of editorial decisions, however. -Splash talk 17:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

List of Weebl and Bob cartoons
A flash animation series. Surely one article on Weebl and Bob must be enough? Forty different articles on the episodes seem a bit much

I am also nominating all the indvidual episode entries (listes on the nominated page), that or merging SELECTED parts of them to the main article Weebl and Bob. Mackan 14:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Clear case of animacruft.  Is the plan that we have the transcripts of every animation which appears on this website? --Deville (Talk) 16:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. This is totally misguided for these reasons:
 * The parent article is the current Macromedia Flash Cartoon Collaboration of the Week. No flash cartoon that isn't noteworthy would get this kind of attention.
 * This is more than just a list. It contains summaries and other information that are not readily available elsewhere.
 * Weebl and Bob are reasonably popular per Google. (Look at the number of search hits returned.)
 * Also, if you are going to delete this WaB list, then you also need to delete List of The Simpsons episodes to be consistent.
 * Nova SS 20:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey I agree on having an article on Weebl and Bob but having each for every single episode? Basically all they contain are the scripts, if you're that into it, look at the damn cartoon, it's on the web for free and they are really SHORT and simple. Concerning the List of Simpsons episodes, I don't think I'm the only one to realise that's a completely different thing. How well known do you think the average Simpsons episode is compared to a Weebl and Bob episode?? Weebl and Bob gets 40 000 hits, which I think is enough for ONE (1) article, but flash artist Joseph Blanchette aka Legendary Frog gets 47000 hits and he almost didn't get a single entry (see listed AFD). Weebl and Bob are well known and deserve an article but not every single episode does. Also, I appreciate the work of Macromedia Flash Cartoon Collaberation but if they spend all their energy towards writing an episode list for Weebl and Bob I think they are greatly misguided. There are so many famous flash artists not represented in Wikipedia, please write about them instead. And if you do, please use the category "Flash artist" I made recently. But don't waste your time here! Mackan 01:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * AFD's purpose is not for us to be server administrators. I am not aware of any Wikipedia disk shortage.


 * The only valid reason to delete these would be non-notability, and and as you seem to agree, Weebl and Bob are notable. Also, there is not a sliding scale of notability. Either it is notable or it isn't. If it is notable, then it is allowed the same privileges of any other notable subject. How deeply it is fleshed out depends entirely on user interest and content volume. Weebl and Bob will never have the level of detail as The Simpsons, but that's mainly because there's just less subject matter. As this example episode shows, there is enough detail to be extracted from individual episodes to justify a separate article.


 * If it's OK for The Simpsons to have episode lists, then it's OK for WaB to have episode lists.


 * Nova SS 01:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * There IS a "sliding scale of notability". Just because it's barely big enough to get one entry doesn't mean you can all of a sudden have 40 new about the same subject. Also, if Donkey_%28Weebl_and_Bob_episode%29 is the best example you've got, I feel sorry for you. Besides the script there is one line ("This episode is the origin of Donkey, as well as the origin of the popular phrase "How rare!""). ""The origin of the popular phrase "How rare""??!?Mackan 02:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This AFD is wrongheaded. Votes in favor of deletion are votes in favor of violating the policy laid out in "Arguments against deleting articles for non-notability" section of the Notability policy. Also, votes in favor of deletion are votes against puppies and kittens. Do you hate puppies and kittens? Nova SS 02:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's not a policy (as explicitly stated on the top of the page, "This is not a policy or guideline"), that's an argument. And if you scroll up just a little bit you'll see there are also Arguments for deleting non-notable articles... which you obviously would know. Please don't throw around false accusations like that. Mackan 02:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You're right: it's not a policy. It's a tool, and it is a valid yardstick for this AFD.


 * If that's not good enough, check out Jimbo Wales's comments on fame that have strong bearing on this AFD. Also check the discussion. As long as it's verifiable, and it is, then notability is unlikely to be a valid argument for deletion.


 * Again, it is not our job to be sys admins. I promise: Wikipedia has enough disk space, and nobody's asking for our help in reducing disk space by deleting verifiable information.


 * As to your other point, please tell me which of the arguments for deletion under non-notability apply that wouldn't be fully canceled by the counterarguments.


 * Nova SS 03:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As it's just two lists of arguments, I don't think they are fully canceled by anything, I don't think that's the nature of what they are saying. They are both just examples of what some editors think (and as it says at the top of the page, not even what most editors think).Mackan 04:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - I agree with Nova SS. -- Jay  (Reply)  23:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is a barely notable web-cartoon/animation, so we should have at least the entry for the cartoon itself. Having details, transcripts, and separate entries for all of the episodes (many less than 2 minutes), however, is a bit much, as is any comprehensive listing of them. This isn't the Simpsons, it's an obscure flash cartoon series. Ronabop 01:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, so obscure that it has its own plush dolls and DVD and a whole series has been featured on MTV UK. Nova SS 01:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment. These articles are in violation of several of the guidelines defined in [this document] (specified as guidelines: "A consensus was reached to accept the guidelines below. --InShaneee 05:02, 16 February 2006 (UTC)"). Example: "Extensive quotation from episodes is a violation of copyright and unlikely to be fair use." "(elements best avoided:) A scene-by-scene synopsis. An overall plot summary is much better; the article should not attempt to be a replacement for watching the show itself, it should be about the show" The entire procedure defined in "Creating articles on television episodes" has not been followed. Under "Dealing with problem articles" it says short articles should be merged with the main article. It also says TV shows should generally not be listed for AfD; however, why I think some of the guidelines could be used for a flash show as well, it is obvious that a flash show is so much less notable than a TV show.Mackan 03:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I understand what you're proposing, and it makes far more sense than deleting List of Weebl and Bob cartoons. Nova SS 03:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm still proposing deleting the list, don't put words into my mouth. Well, I dunno, maybe the list could be kept but the individual episode entries are definately too much. Even the episode list seems so redundant, it seems like not even fans would care much about it.Mackan 04:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak keep --James 03:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge Bo-Lingua 06:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC) I don't think that we should have the texts of each, but a synopsis and notable bits would be a good idea to keep.
 * Keep the list plus synopses, Delete individual episode articles --Stevefarrell 11:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Could somebody relist this?
 * Keep. --- Schnee (cheeks clone)


 * 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.