Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transmogrifier


 * 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 Redirect to Calvin and Hobbes. Glass  Cobra  17:13, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Transmogrifier

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

Non-notable term, used only in Calvin & Hobbes and a few other unsourced uses. No reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Transmogrify into a redirect to Calvin & Hobbes, where it is a common plot device. The other meanings are barely significant. --Dhartung | Talk 01:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect honestly, I lean towards delete as this term only has significance in the C&H world. JuJube (talk) 02:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge & redir - As a frequent plot device, it would seem to be a viable search term for C&H fans exploring WP. Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  aka Spaceman Spiff :D 03:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep the term is entering mainstream usage. For example there is the notable Transmogrifier C compiler. I can't think of any other single word offhand which conveys what "Transmogrifier" does. Annette46 (talk) 04:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep If we assume good faith on the list of other instances at the end of the article, and I don't see any reason why not to, transmogrifiers are catching on. Steve Dufour (talk) 05:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep being used in Calvin and Hobbes makes it notable -- it is/was a nationally syndicated comic strip that was so popular, it was made into books, calendars, shirts, rear-window decals, etc. While this doesn't necessarily justify the transmogrifier's notability, I'd say anyone familiar with C&H is familiar with the transmogrifier, thus supporting its notability.  DRosenbach  ( Talk 12:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge into Calvin and Hobbes unless it can be shown that Watterson coined the word/usage - which I doubt. Not that the thing isn't notable, but there just isn't enough to say about it that it deserves its own entry separate from the strip. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Transmogrify per Dhartung, Spiffy & Alex ↑. --Evb-wiki (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: The term is a commonplace that really doesn't need explanation.  As a feature of Calvin and Hobbes, it's fanboi stuff.  We have no real need to preserve or amplify like that, and Calvin and Hobbes doesn't need this level of detail added to it.  Let me put it this way: ask yourself this: "Is anyone hearing 'transmogrifier' and needing to look it up in an encyclopedia to find out about how it's used in Calvin and Hobbes?"  If the answer is "no," then we don't need a break out article.  For the answer to be "yes," this would have to be something like "zoink" or Zonker.  It isn't.  Utgard Loki (talk) 17:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The word "transmogrifier" has been around longer than Calvin and Hobbes. They just made it popular. According to the OED, it is centuries older. Whether or not a subject is notable seems to be a matter of opinion. I have heard the word used several times in common conversation, without refrence to the comics. Bryce Pearson (talk) 02:26, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The simple existence of a word is not notable. the article, as it stands, is all about Calvin and Hobbes, and should be merged. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Transwiki with reformat to Wiktionary.  Oc t  ane  [ improve me? ] 19.08.08 1723 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep If somebody wants to know what a transmogrifier was this would be a good place to find out. Thylacinus cynocephalus (talk) 04:04, 24 August 2008 (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.