Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pingu (series 1)


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:25, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Pingu (series 1)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

What is this bollocks? 26 sections of unencyclopedic cruft. Each could be surmised in 26 sentences between them - the titles. The only interesting bits are the information about banned episodes, which is actually why I came here from Pingu. Pingu (series 2), Pingu (series 3), Pingu (series 4), Pingu (series 5) and Pingu (series 6) also require being correspondingly binned. Laun chba  ller  21:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * AfD notices added for the additional articles. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * AfD notices added for the additional articles. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * AfD notices added for the additional articles. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * AfD notices added for the additional articles. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 01:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete all. Watch the episodes, instead. Unsourced and much too detailed for 5-min long cartoons. Kraxler (talk) 16:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete the lot .... Unbelievably like the nom I can't actually describe any of this other than pure bollocks!, This could all be shoved in to a "List of episode" type format which would be far more informative than this crap. – Davey 2010 Talk 01:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well I see we already have List of Pingu episodes so why isn't that in the correct format (IE like this), Anyway better off deleted. – Davey 2010 Talk 01:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and above editors. Info already exists in the list article.  Onel 5969  TT me 17:18, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete No opposition. No purpose. Shinerite (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as fancruft.  Scr ★ pIron IV 13:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This is a much loved children's cartoon. We have a lot of lists of episodes in WP, I am not sure why this is different from other episode lists.  Why single this one out?  I do not think it is as "unsourced" as claimed: there is clearly an implied source, from watching it on TV or DVD.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It's mostly OR anyway. Have you ever seen Pingu? If yes, you would know that the episodes can not be described in such a manner as in this list. It's a stop-motion animation without discernable speech, inviting the children to watch and find out what it means, to train their imagination. To have one particular detailed interpretation is counterproductive, and is against Wikipedia rules (no OR). Kraxler (talk) 18:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It is also a question of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - many of those should be deleted as well.  Scr ★ pIron IV 18:05, 13 August 2015 (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.