Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walt Disney hibernation urban legend


 * 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 Walt Disney. The page history will remain available for editors interested in merging content, though there isn't much to work with. --BDD (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Walt Disney hibernation urban legend

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page describes an urban legend regarding the death of Walt Disney, with minimal references, and minimal credibility. Most of the text of this article is already included at Walt_Disney, I don't see why this subject warrants an additional article. C(u)w(t)C(c) 20:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 20:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 20:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 20:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Previously nominated for deletion in 2010. Looks like a duplicate of the information already found on Walt Disney's main page. Same sources cited. PaintedCarpet (talk) 20:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, two sources aren't sufficient to establish notability. Should redirect to Walt Disney, since, as mentioned by CWC, this article's content can already can be found there. Jinkinson   talk to me  21:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the appropriate section of the parent article. It actually spent over a year in that state before being silently reverted to article form by an IP editor. There's not enough to say, nor strong enough sources, nor compelling size issues with the parent article to justify making this a spinout in my appraisal, and direct content forks are discouraged. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Walt Disney. There's no reason to split from the parent article yet. Deletion is also acceptable, but this may actually be a useful redirect. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to main article. There's no shortage of sources from the reliable to the less so. But none of them (at least the reliable ones) really have much to say except "it's not true." It's useful to keep the stuff in this article about possible sources for the myth, because with a myth like this tracing its history is the most encyclopedic thing to do. --Colapeninsula (talk) 00:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Walt Disney. No reason to split. Cavarrone 06:05, 4 November 2013 (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.