Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Park title 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   merge to South Park. Spartaz Humbug! 20:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

South Park title sequence

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

Lacks third-party citations (debatable as this may not be possible)

Does not meet standards for Notability on its own as an article for a 30 second title sequence.

This AfD serves to initiate debate for the deletion of an article as opposed to a Proposed Deletion which does not give ample time to come to consensus on a deletion or keep of an article nor does it give time to come up with alternatives to the deletion of an article which may include merging it into a different article. ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ② talk 16:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Yes, I am aware of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but the most blatant example of why this article should be kept is The Simpsons opening sequence. They basically have the same degree of reception, and, to top it off, there is a separate article for all the separate couch gags. If nothing else, the Simpsons variation should be up for discussion...for merge, though, instead of deletion. And yes, there are a few sources, though it is just about impossible to get third party citations (as you said above). Cheers,  I 'mperator 18:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC) Changing vote to Merge TO South Park per Alastairward and User:Evilgohan2. Unlike different opening sequences, South Park's opening sequence isn't very influential on modern pop culture. Cheers,  I 'mperator 13:02, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  --  I 'mperator 18:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep For same reasoning as aboveMark E (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm no fan of South Park, but it's a very famous and successful TV show; famous enough that even its 30-second opening sequence deserves a Wikipedia article. Samboy (talk) 19:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. To Samboy, notability is not inherited and should be cited. To ImperatorExercitus and Mark E, the reason The Simpsons opening sequence warrants its own article is because of the existence of notability outside of the show itself, it has been used as a noted live action advertisement campaign and in reference to the controversy caused by an episode. Nor is there evidence of an impact on popular culture such as with Star Trek and Star Wars for example. Alastairward (talk) 23:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm...But then, doesn't this warrant at least some notability? "The theme music is performed by Primus, sung by Les Claypool." The fact that a notable band performs their theme song makes it notable, right? If not, then I guess you're right, and I'll change my vote. Cheers,  I 'mperator 23:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would argue that it doesn't, but the difference, as noted by Alastairward, is the notability and following they attract. When The Simpsons went HD and received a new title sequence, it even was published and followed by multiple media outlets. No such thing has ever happened for any of the 4+ changes of the South Park title sequence. Additionally, although Green Day did perform a cover of the theme to The Simpsons - and it was featured in the feature film, that alone did not make it notable. The Simpsons has been followed to the point that people en masse follow the differences of each different couch sequence as well as what Bart might write on the chalkboard. ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ②  talk 00:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge My personal perspective is that the article be condensed and merged into the main South Park article. ⒺⓋⒾ ⓁⒼⓄ ⒽⒶⓃ ②  talk 00:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete isn't notable by the nutshell definition. Oh, and the distinction between this sequence and the Simpsons opening sequence? The latter is notable. Sceptre (talk) 02:45, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into South Park, assuming one can find reliable secondary sources that discuss the topic. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge as above. --Merovingian (T, C, L) 07:34, 10 August 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.