Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sesame Street closing sequence


 * 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. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick   {C}  11:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Sesame Street closing sequence

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

total fancruft about a closing sequence/credits of a show. This is not encyclopedic. Booshakla 19:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete not worthy of its own article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samael775 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC).
 * keep this article. 66.153.66.42 20:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please make up your mind as you just substituted the article with a redirect, but do not overwrite the AfD tag. Tikiwont 21:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * keep; an extensive and thorough article on a valid subject. needs a lot of cleanup, but no reason to delete. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 22:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The article itself isn't of the proper tone, but the subject itself isn't a problem. The opening and closing credits of a major television show can be significant (besides Sesame Street, I'd include the Simpsons, Tiny Toons, Pinky and the Brain in the list of shows where the credits matter.), and in this case, there's enough information that it probably can't be adequately covered in the main article on Sesame Street.  Still, I wouldn't object to a merge. I do however, object to a AfD that is made with the complaint of fancruft.  I find that offensive and uncivil.  Please try to make your nominations in more neutral language.  FrozenPurpleCube 22:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the simpsons credits are probably notable, but why would Seasame Street's? It's just total fancruft that is of interest to basically no one, it should be deleted, no questions asked.  Booshakla 22:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sesame Street is as much of a cultural phenomena as the Simpson's, so I accept that a description of the credits is appropriate.
 * How can I, as a random Wikipedia reader, check that this article's description of, say, the closing credits in 1970–1971, or of episode #131, is accurate? This question is brought to you by the letters V and NOR. Uncle G 01:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ultimately, only by watching the episode in question. However, I think  this source might be more of what you're asking for.  It's also possible there's more to be found at the Smithsonian exhibit.  So as far as it goes, I'm not concerned that it can be sourced.  However, that is a question that needs to be referred to the editors.  FrozenPurpleCube 04:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge into Sesame Street. Totally unencyclopedic.-MsHyde 03:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per MsHyde. JuJube 07:16, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm actually torn on this, since there's a lot more to the article than I expected. But I'm going to say delete, because the closing credits of individual shows should really not have their own articles. --Stevefarrell 12:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If Delete, move that page to Muppet Wika. I vote for keep. BlairsvilleHighSchool 14:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, "The opening and closing credits of a major television show can be significant". Mathmo Talk 17:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, it needs cleanup and sourcing.  And yes, verifying in some way other than watching all the episodes is difficult, but that's the case for a lot of articles we have about TV shows.  When a show has had over 4000 episodes, an article about the history of the closing credits seems quite reasonable, especially since they've changed a lot over the years.  Pinball22 18:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete General assertions about about the worthyness or significance of closing credits (whether in favour or not) do not help here. With respect to sources for the closing sequences in question, the number of the day is 0 (zero). If an article topic has no reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. This is together with not publishing here for the first time whatever topic one would like to see covered (WP:NOR) are core policies of wikipedia, no matter how often they are ignored.Tikiwont 22:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * KEEP 66.153.65.75 02:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete; a minor subject that's not even important enough to mention in the main Sesame Street article; unreferenced OR. &mdash;tregoweth (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If deleted, move that page to muppet wika, but i say KEEP.66.153.35.102 01:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * KEEP66.153.35.214 13:28, 14 February 2007 (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.