Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. kingboyk (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As another editor mentioned on the talk page, this article was deleted after an AfD in early 2017, with the reason for nomination being "No reliable sources found. Only sources are a Wayback link, a 404, and a YouTube link. Special only aired once. No third party reviews found, only 128 unique Google hits and no relevant hits in Books." Concerns raised then do not appear to have been resolved. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 01:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 01:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Moaz786 (talk to me or see what I've been doing) 01:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - Has received coverage and general notoriety for its poor quality:
 * 1) "Believe" it: "Santa" sucks! from TV barn
 * 2) Exploiting the Archives Week: This Looks Terrible! Rapsittie Street Kids: Believe in Santa from film critic Nathan Rabin
 * 3) We dare you to watch the worst Christmas special of all time from KTEM
 * 4) 7 completely bizarre christmas specials you probably forgot existed from Rotten Tomatoes
 * 5) Spread some holiday fear with this horrific 2002 computer-animated Christmas special from The A.V. Club
 * Rabin's review is particularly in-depth, but none of these are truly just incidental or trivial. They all go in to some detail about the film, and multiple sources have called it one of the worst holiday specials in history, a strong sign of notability. It has also been reviewed by the Notalgia Critic. All of this combined with the unusually strong voice cast lend a strong weight that this is indeed a notable article - substantial coverage has, indeed, been met since the last deletion, which is not surprising given the film had remained lost for years and thus could not receive any new coverage until it had been found again and widely circulated. Toa Nidhiki05 01:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another source from Quest News. This is a school paper FWIW but I think it lends credence to the film's poor quality being notable. Toa Nidhiki05 01:47, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I say keep the article, there was already a version made ages ago, but it never got verified simply because nobody thought to give it more than two sources. There are more than enough verified sources for this version. The Rabin review posted earlier might need some looking at, but the rest the sources listed checks out IMO. Zucat (talk)
 * Keep per above, sourcing is maybe not top-shelf but clearly substantial enough to suggest notability. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:48, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as it has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as The AV Club, passes WP:GNG thanks, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2019 (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.