Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Well Oiled (film)


 * 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 Woody Woodpecker filmography. ✗ plicit  11:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Well Oiled (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Most of Woody Woodpecker shorts have been integrated in Woody Woodpecker filmography; a few still remain. Some correctly so, as they are notable, but this one does not appear to be so. All we have is a stubby plot summary and infobox catalogue-like data. The ref to "The Encyclopedia of Animated Cartoons" is misleading, so no, it's not "two page of coverage", it's two pages in it that have WP:SIGCOV-failing passing mentions (and incorrectly so, this short is mentioned on p. 148 and 153, at lest in my edition). Anyway, the short is never discussed, it's just listed in the two separate lists of WW's shorts. Given that, I suggest redirecting this to Woody Woodpecker filmography. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Comics and animation. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect to Woody Woodpecker filmography. Ref 1 is online, but clearly a non-reliable SPS blog. I'm unsure on how long the coverages of the printed refs are, but considering that ref 2 only supports one sentence (assering the film is the 24th animated cartoon short subject in the Woody Woodpecker series), and ref 3 another two sentences, with a link that can't be opened, I'm inclined to agree with that the book doesn't cover this film for two pages. So, with none of the refs being reliable, independent, and significant, neither WP:GNG nor any WP:NFILM criteria are met. VickKiang (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @VickKiang FYI, the book can be accessed through Z-library, if you feel like verifying my claims. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per above. Handmeanotherbagofthemchips (talk) 15:47, 26 August 2022 (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.