Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of funny animals in the media


 * 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 - as per consensus. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

List of funny animals in the media

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

WP:LC (the list is of interest to a very limited group and possibly unmaintainable), also widely obsolete because of List of fictional animals and List of anthropomorphic animal superheroes. Kotiwalo (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Note that Funny animal is defined though, so it's not inherently POV. Kotiwalo (talk) 17:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Cleanup, Move and Keep Clean up the article, try to thin out non-notable characters. Particularly ones without their own Wiki Articles. And remove the movies, this is a list of characters not movies. And remove non-comedic Characters like Sonic the Hedgehog and My Little Pony (WTF?). Keep this list down to the notable and influential characters, (such as Tom and Jerry, Bugs Bunny, etc.) And we should move the page to something more appropriate for Wikipedia (I propose List of Animals in Comedic Culture.) To quote Linus: "It's not a bad article, it just needs some love" KMFDM FAN  (talk!) 19:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Do not rename to List of Animals in Comedic Culture or remove non-comedic characters. Funny animal is a term that has nothing to do with whether the character is humorous. Edward321 (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Better suited as a category. Regardless of what happens, remove "in the media". They're not showing up anywhere else. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete My pet is hilarious, but she doesn't deserve to be on any list ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 18:15, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Your pet doesn't deserve to be on the list cause it's not in the media. It's a list of funny animals in the media. KMFDM FAN  (talk!) 21:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 11 commercials, 3 TV movies, 8 music videos ... nope, not in the media at all. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 09:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The nominator did point out that there is a specific meaning to the term "funny animal". Your pet is in no way related to the scope of this list. -- Quiddity (talk) 23:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, based on that she doesn't belong. However, the original comment was rhetorical.  ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 09:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think that word means what you think it means (? check rhetoric). Or, you are admitting that your original !vote was intentionally confusing (in which case: please don't. things are confusing enough around here already...). -- Quiddity (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The word means exactly what I meant. The !vote was certainly valid, the part about my dog was rhetorical.  Let's be careful with the WP:AGFing please. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 09:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not questioning your goodfaith, I'm questioning your choice of example. Why were you bringing up a breathing mammal as an example, when the discussion is clearly about fictional anthropomorphic characters? Was it just an attempt at humor? Did you (along with some of the other participants here) just not read the "Note that Funny animal is defined though" part of the nom? Were you trying to use rhetoric to convince us of something? If so, what? (If you understand what I'm getting at, then you can treat these as rhetorical questions and ignore them ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want my opinion about this, you should discuss the fate of this article rather than that. Deletion discussions are confusing already. Kotiwalo (talk) 06:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article mostly doesn't list characters, but rather the titles of works that the characters appear in (Bambi, TMNT, etc). Perhaps renaming would be a workable option (as Wesley suggests above)? Also very western-centric. Parts of it could be rescued. I'd lean towards keep for a !vote. -- Quiddity (talk) 23:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 2 previous AFDs: Articles for deletion/List of funny animals in media (no consensus, February 2007) and Articles for deletion/List of funny animals in media (2nd nomination) (no consensus, October 2008). And no attempt to discuss or clarify scope on the article's talkpage. C'mon people, this is basic due diligence. -- Quiddity (talk) 23:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Ouch. A classic case of a list with an overly-broad definition, being inappropriate per WP:SALAT.  Several encyclopedic lists can be split out from the subsections within this list, but this is too broad even for a category.  Them  From  Space  05:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm in favor of making this a category instead of keeping it as a list. Any reason why this should remain as a list, or why this shouldn't be turned into a category? Kotiwalo (talk) 06:27, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong delete, then turn it into a category. it's too much to make it a stand alone article but maybe a category would fit. just don't call it funny, since it's not very objective to use such an adjective in an article, even less in a category.--camr nag 23:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually funny animal is defined (see my nomination message). It is an animation term referring to all anthropomorphic animals (not just the actually funny ones). It has caused a bit of confusion though. Kotiwalo (talk) 07:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * ok, then that should be noted on the introduction of the potencial category.--camr nag 19:09, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, but maybe it should still be renamed to something that isn't so confusing, like anthropomorphic animals or something like that. Kotiwalo (talk) 10:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * that's a better option.--camr nag 14:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:CLT this should never be a list. Jclemens (talk) 01:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * New Vote -Category- I've changed my vote in favor of making this a category. KMFDM FAN  (talk!) 15:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm in favor of category too, does anyone oppose cleanup, checking, and moving to a category? Kotiwalo (talk) 07:06, 23 July 2009 (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.