Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snowball (The Simpsons)


 * 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   merge to Simpson_family. This is quite a close call, but there seems to be quite a bit more policy-based discussion based around a Merge here. Even some of the Keep comments also indicate some agreement with a merge. Black Kite (talk) 22:32, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Snowball (The Simpsons)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This article cites no sources, and is literally just a plot summary of five fictional cats. There is no real world context (creation, development, reception, etc.), and it has been tagged with the in-universe tag since 2009. It may be a plausible search term, so I think a merge and redirect to Simpson family would be appropriate. TRLIJC19  (  talk  ) 01:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect (and perhaps merge some information). I agree with the nom. I have tried to find reliable, secondary sources for this article in the past but there aren't any that address the subject in detail. It's just trivial mentions. Much of the information currently in the article needs to be cut out as it is just plot material and too detailed. And since there aren't any sources that can be used for "Development" and "Reception" sections, this article really should be directed to Simpson family. Theleftorium (talk) 12:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 15:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 15:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  Gongshow  Talk 15:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - The cat(s) is (are) a notable part of the Simpson family. If we get rid of this article, we mind as well get rid of Santa's Little Helper. Failing that, the article should be merged and redirected to Simpson family.  Dough 48  72  15:40, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: The difference between this article and Santa's Little Helper, is that the latter actually contains real world context, making it a notable subject. Just because the subject is notable to The Simpsons does not make it notable to Wikipedia; this is not a fansite for The Simpsons, but rather an encyclopedia.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 18:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I was the one who wrote Santa's Little Helper and I voted delete/merge here. These characters are different in that there actually sources that talk about the dog in detail, making Development, Reception, and Influence sections possible. An article like that couldn't be written about Snowball. The fact that the cat is a part of the Simpson family isn't important as notability is not inherited. Theleftorium (talk) 21:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Mentioned in multiple books: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6... and that's just on the first two pages of Google Books results. Some of the references are trivial, but in completely odd places: A Spanish lesson?  An Essay Writing treatise?  I'm not familiar with the fictional cartoon cat, but it appears to meet the GNG to me, without even trying to look at Google Scholar... Jclemens (talk) 16:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * All but two of those sources are trivial mentions. The others just mention what happened in one of the show's episodes. So I wouldn't say the subject meets the GNG. And here's no "real-world" information at all. You can't just have an article comprised only of plot information (WP:WHIM). Theleftorium (talk) 21:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You're ignoring the presence in places *unrelated* to the Simpsons--those references demonstrate real world impact, even if they are trivial mentions; that's why I included them. Jclemens (talk) 05:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't support articles consisting of plot summaries and trivial mentions. If it did, we'd have far too many pointless ones.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 05:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep though I agree with the senitiment of the nominator, the cat is showing up everywhere. We should really have some article rescue going on though, before the article gets off the chopping block, i.e. adding sources, and making sure that the sources we are finding are adequete to maintain notability, Sadads (talk) 16:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to Simpson family. While there are sources when you search for them, most are extremely trivial.  As in, literally, many of them are just mentions in trivia books.  Unlike Santa's Little Helper and other minor Simpsons characters who have their own pages, the cat(s) in this article have been largely background characters with only a very low number of episodes in which they play any importance at all.  In fact, two of the four cats written about appeared only in a single episode, and a large portion of this article is merely a plot summary of that one episode.  However, I think it would be perfectly fine to expand the section on the cat(s) already present at Simpson family with some of the more notable information here, and leave this page as a redirect.  Rorshacma (talk) 16:51, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to Simpson family. Snowball is a background character whose irrelevance and replaceability occasionally serves as a running joke. I disagree with the Santa's Little Helper comparison, the dog is legitimately a main character, and has had multiple episodes centered around him.--SGCM  (talk)  20:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to Simpson family. Most of the Snowballs are not notable enough for their own article, but a couple of them are. A merge would also be acceptable, but deletion would be a removal of valuable information. Bazonka (talk) 21:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some are notable, and at the very lest, merge into Simpson family. Also, per the above comments. TBrandley 05:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you give reason to make them notable? Trivial mentions in a book does not meet the GNG. Nor does a plot summary. There are no references in the article. If you are pushing for a 'keep', please give reason.  TRLIJC19   (  talk  ) 05:47, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'll go with a merge information into Simpson family. No need to remove info, so. TBrandley 05:53, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Just because it isn't the best article doesn't mean it doesn't belong. It's a regular character in a long-running popular TV show. Of course it merits an article. It should be improved, not removed. --LDC (talk) 01:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: Your rationale is irrelevant. As I've said; just because it is important to The Simpsons does not make it notable for Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, not a Simpsons fanpage. Nobility is not inherited, so it doesn't matter how popular the show is. There are no sources available for this topic, except for trivial mentions and plot details. How this is not being understood is beyond me. TRLIJC19  ( talk  •  contribs ) 01:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 *  (sorry... I had to do that..... :D, but Merge nonetheless). This is a notable family member of a very notable family of a very notable animated series.--Coin945 (talk) 05:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * What exactly makes her notable? Notability is not inherited. Theleftorium (talk) 09:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I never said WP:INHERIT was the case at all. That's WP:OR on your part. I merely explained that imo, Snowball is a notable (series of) cat(s), that happens to be part of a notable family, which hails from a notable tv show. Nothing more, nothing less. Now, the notability of the cat(s), I am willing to admit is up for debate... :D--Coin945 (talk) 09:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds exactly like WP:INHERIT to me - you're not sure if the cats meet the notability guidelines, but you think they are notable because they are a part of a notable family. Theleftorium (talk) 09:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No. I'm getting to that now. It's like saying: "well, i'm pretty sure cat is notable... and hey, its cool that cat is a subsection of animal, which is notable, which is a subsection of creature, which is like totally notable!! :)". Here are the sources that I found for Snowball (NOTE: this is not a complete list of sources out there).


 * 1) Planet Cat: A Cat-Alog
 * 2) 1,001 Things You Always Wanted To Know About Cats
 * 3) [books.google.com.au/books?id=RKd9xK80dfcC&pg=PA58&lpg=PA58&dq=snowball+simpsons&source=bl&ots=UpkqgR658J&sig=3oZyez3u5a_C87AAcjCoMlF2A48&hl=en&sa=X&ei=llgWULT1E-iNiAegwoGIDA&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBDgK#v=onepage&q=snowball simpsons&f=false The Zombie Movie Encyclopedia]
 * 4) The Godfather Was a Girl - makes allusions to Animal Farm in pages not in the preview
 * 5) Fundamentals of Animal Science
 * 6) The Simpsons in the Classroom: Embiggening the Learning Experience With the Wisdom of Springfield
 * 7) Toys and American Culture: An Encyclopedia
 * 8) Top 10 Segments From 'The Simpsons' Treehouse Of Horror
 * 9) In toon with the times
 * 10) search
 * A lot of those sources are unreliable, particularly further down the list (in fact one of them is a Wikipedia mirror). The others are passing mentions of the cat(s) that are completely useless for this article, and/or just plot summaries. If you combine all noteworthy information about this cat that can be gathered from reliable secondary sources you have about one paragraph of text and therefore this cannot be a stand-alone article. There simply isn't enough info to write a good article about Snowball. If you take a look at the sources you listed you will see this for yourself. Theleftorium (talk) 12:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, new argument: looking at the references for Santa's Little Helper, the masses of plot are taken from the Wikipedia articles on the respective episodes, so that part is covered, but the really juicy stuff on character development and history etc. is completely sourced by DVD commentaries... stuff that we will NEVER be able to find via any sort of Google search imaginable (sorry for the hyperbole :D). So I guess to find the article-keeping material, our local video store (if those things are even still around anymore.. my local one closed down recently) is where we should be heading to save this article.--Coin945 (talk) 13:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm perfectly fine with a merge - my only issue with this article is that there's not enough noteworthy real-world information for it to be a stand-alone article. I own quite a lot of Simpsons books with analysis about the show and as far as I know, none of those analyse anything about the character Snowball - they just mention her when talking about the plot of certain episodes. The book sources you found I would say are reliable. But fansites such as #11, 13, and 14 are not. #10 is a Wikipedia mirror so that can't be used either. Theleftorium (talk) 13:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Look, I wrote the article Santa's Little Helper! An article like that couldn't be written about Snowball since there is basically no Development, Reception, or Influence information available about her! Go ahead and rent the DVDs, you won't find anything useful there. I've listened to every commentary track at least twice. Theleftorium (talk) 13:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ahhh... should've guessed by your name and all that you're an expert on this and are probably getting rather frustrated at all the noobiness :D. Wasn't trying to be difficult or anything. I'm just one of those innocent until proven guilty kinda guys and was making sure we covered all bases before going in for the kill. You have totally convinced me. A merge it is. :D (btw, great work on SLH!)--Coin945 (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've poured my heart into the Simpsons Wikiproject for almost four years now so yeah when I'm trying to improve Wikipedia's coverage of The Simpsons (in this case merging an article that can't stand on its own), it's kind of frustrating when people who aren't involved with the project prevent me and the other members of the project in our work. That's why some of my comments here sound a bit negative. But I'm glad you were willing to take part in a discussion. :) Theleftorium (talk) 14:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * :) IMO, everything in that post you just made should probably be your opening statement - that you *are* an experienced editor who has read everything there is to read on this subject and who has an intellectual high ground over AFD skimmers who probably just came to defend that cat from that TV show they used to watch (that's not me btw). I know we're not supposed to own articles or anything, but by simply stating your opinion it melds into the chaotic discussion... I think you need to show that you (having absorbed all reliable sources out there) are a reliable source in your own right, and that therefore your opinion holds a lot more ground. It would certainly smooth over your Simpsons-related discussions.--Coin945 (talk) 15:13, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No one said anything about deletion. Even in my description of why it's not notable on the very first line, I clearly wrote merge and redirect. TRLIJC19  ( talk  •  contribs ) 15:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, Theleftorium's original proposal was delete/redirect. I was referring to his comment.--Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ... which in retrospect actually sounds a lot like a redirect.... hmmm... I see your point.. :D--Coin945 (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well he/she said delete and redirect and merge, so he/she probably meant merge the info, blank the page, and redirect it to Simpsons family. TRLIJC19  ( talk  •  contribs ) 15:29, 30 July 2012 (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.
 * Actually, Theleftorium's original proposal was delete/redirect. I was referring to his comment.--Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ... which in retrospect actually sounds a lot like a redirect.... hmmm... I see your point.. :D--Coin945 (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Well he/she said delete and redirect and merge, so he/she probably meant merge the info, blank the page, and redirect it to Simpsons family. TRLIJC19  ( talk  •  contribs ) 15:29, 30 July 2012 (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.