Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Animation/Tasks

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Animation
MainTalkAssessmentParticipantsShowcaseTasksResourcesTemplatesHelpPortal
WikiProject Animation
Information
Archives
1, 2, 3, Index
Threads older than 30 days may
be archived by MiszaBot II.
Departments
Project organization
Task forces
Related projects
Descendant projects
Animation Portal • Changes
Shortcuts

This is the a list of tasks that either need regular attention for WikiProject Animation.

To do list

edit

Cleanup listing

edit

A cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Unreferenced BLPs

edit

This is the list of Unreferenced BLPs automatically generated by DASHBot.

There are no unreferenced BLPs tagged by Template:WikiProject Animation.

Requested articles

edit
Requested articles
Experimental animation
Films
The King's Beard, Timothy Tweedle the First Christmas Elf, The Return of the Prodigal Parrot [ru]
Television
Cyboars, Louie (animated show), Simsalagrimm, Brainphreak
People
Andrew Kepple, Chasen Kay, Vince Collins, Corin Hardy, Kondoh Akino
Studios
Studio CGI
edit


New articles

edit
New articles by topic — New articles (Animation)

The following articles have been identified by InceptionBot as potentially being within the scope of the project, based on the Animation ruleset. It is likely that some of them are false positives; please examine the log if you have any questions.

This page lists recently created Animation-related articles. Remember to nominate the best new articles at Template talk:Did you know so Wikipedia can highlight them on the main page.

This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.

Rules | Match log | Results page (for watching) | Last updated: 2024-10-28 19:30 (UTC)

Note: The list display can now be customized by each user. See List display personalization for details.


Article alerts

edit

Articles for deletion

Categories for discussion

Redirects for discussion

(1 more...)

Good article nominees

(1 more...)

Good article reassessments

Peer reviews

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

(13 more...)

Articles for creation

Deletion discussions

edit
To edit this section, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation

Richard the Lion

edit
Richard the Lion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No refs on the page for many years. Nothing much found to suggest this character in a comic is notable. JMWt (talk) 18:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stilt-Man

edit
AfDs for this article:
Stilt-Man (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This got restored recently after its prior AfD last year. It was restored per new sourcing, but this sourcing is nowhere near significant enough to verify separate notability. I've discussed this on the talk page with the editor who revived the article, and I will transclude the source analysis I left there for simplicity's sake:

1. A Comicbook.com listicle which gives a single paragraph among a large number of other characters. The actual paraphrasing of the source in the article is nearly as long if not longer than the source's own, and the actual source itself is really only saying "He's a fan favorite" with little to no other additional commentary beyond that. This source's importance I feel is being blown out of proportion in the current article as it stands.

2. A Game Rant source which doesn't contribute to notability per Wikipedia:VALNET. While there's an ongoing discussion for this, until that discussion's come to a close, the current policy should still be adhered to. Game Rant is a low quality content farm a large bulk of the time, and cannot be considered a good indicator of subject notability.

3. A MovieWeb listicle, which, while alright, is still only one half-decent source in what is evidently a character with very little Wikipedia:SIGCOV or coverage independently focusing on the character. MovieWeb is additionally owned by Valnet, but I am admittedly unsure if it is also a content farm to the same degree Valnet usually is with sources like Game Rant or CBR, or if it actually publishes solid content consistently like some other valid Valnet sources like Collider and TheGamer.

The only other source here that was a notable addition is a book source, which is only used to verify plot information, and thus does not seem to contribute toward notability. I left this detailed summary to the reviver on the talk page of the article, and received no response. Given the controversial nature of another BLAR as a result, I've elected to take this back to AfD to settle this. There's really only about one source that seems to give any degree of notability, and it's small and seemingly the only one to exist. As it stands, there doesn't seem to be any degree of substantial improvement since the last AfD, and this should be redirected back to the list Stilt-Man had been redirected to previously. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @BOZ, who revived the article, for input in this discussion. Additionally pinging @Industrial Insect, @Piotrus, @Rtkat3, and @BoomboxTestarossa, who participated in the previous AfD, for input. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep based on sources added, including "The Supervillain Book: The Evil Side of Comics and Hollywood" which I added, and additional sources added by others, otherwise restore merge as per last AFD. I will note that at the time of the first AFD, there were only 3 non-primary sources. BOZ (talk) 18:03, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or merge per the claims that @BOZ: made in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. Plus, Stilt-Man was among the articles that @Industrial Insect: did a mass-AFD on outside of Abner Jenkins, Beetle, Boomerang, Burglar, Roderick Kingsley, and anyone else I can't recall right now. Plus, Lady Stilt-Man is her own character that is currently at List of Marvel Comics characters: L in the spirit of WP:PRESERVE. --Rtkat3 (talk) 18:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore Redirect & Merge New Sources - The non-plot summary content is still very weak. The sources used in the "Reception" section, even if one were to discount the discussion on the usability of the Valnet sites, is pretty trivial, with the discussion of the character largely just being speculations of "maybe he will show up in this upcoming movie/show/game". The Supervillain Book is far and away the most significant coverage added, and even that has very little commentary outside of plot and publication history summaries. So overall, I do not believe that there is still enough coverage on the character to justify a full article separate from the extensive coverage of the character already at List of Marvel Comics characters: S. Some of the newly added sources, such as the aforementioned book, should be added to that section, though. Rorshacma (talk) 19:11, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoé Kézako

edit
Zoé Kézako (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Almost completely unsourced, heavily POV article. BEFORE showed no reviews or news. From what I can find, subject does not meet GNG. StartGrammarTime (talk) 15:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by MeTV Toons

edit
List of programs broadcast by MeTV Toons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Channel with 99% reruns of older series, their programming lacks notability. Fram (talk) 07:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or delete other articles First, note on the reason this article was created. The material in this article was transferred from MeTV Toons, which made the article as noted "too long to comfortably read the main article". This article/list is not any different from others on Wikipedia. It contains references provided by other editors for verification. This article is directly the same as others under the category: Lists_of_television_series_by_network. Please visit this category to confirm. If we limit articles/lists to original programming and not list rerun programs, we will need to delete a lot of articles/lists such as ION or Antenna TV for example. Thus, what do we consider as "notable"?. This is not the only channel that is currently listed on Wikipedia as per quote "Channel with 99% reruns of older series, their programming lacks notability." Msw1002 (talk) 19:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I do say about this list article, it does need some cleanup. However, deletion doesn't sound correct. Rivertown (talk) 00:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Every television channel that exist doesn't get to list every single program they show. These are shows someone else created for different channels. Only one original program, so no need for a list for just that. Dream Focus 15:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment As someone mentioned above, where does it say a list qualifies as notable when it only lists original programs specifically? I can see the concern over a list, especially not referenced. I did not create this list, just moved it out of the main article, which was becoming too long with this list included. The lists such as List of programs broadcast by Antenna TV and others have been on Wikipedia for over a decade with no issues at this point. Just mentioning....
    Msw1002 (talk) 00:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Warfare 2: Ghost

edit
Modern Warfare 2: Ghost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tie-in promotional comic series that fails the general notability guidelines, with practically no sourcing outside of "look, this exists!" and trivial mentions in my WP:BEFORE searches. There is no critical reception, or significant coverage to speak of. Even if it was notable, I'm pretty sure that it fails NOPAGE as it's near entirely unsourced plot summary. I tried to redirect it to Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 a while ago, but it got undone recently for being a "poor excuse" and an "unreasonable deletion". I suggest restoring that redirect. λ NegativeMP1 16:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antik Mahmud

edit
Antik Mahmud (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence or claim of notability. None of the sources provide the in-depth coverage needed for GNG. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 13:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Improve
He is notable, but the problem is there. I think the lack of proper writing, the need to add more information, and the carrier is empty. UzbukUdash (talk) 15:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@UzbukUdash, I kinda agree with you. He’s definitely notable, but yeah, I see the problem too. The writing feels rough in spots, and there’s definitely more information that could be added, I’m working on it in my sandbox and trying to develop it further. Bruno 🌹 (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please provide references supporting your keep !votes to establish notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 14:32, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These pieces are generally accompanied by an introductory bio. The news organizations aren't transparent about where those capsule bios come from. One has to evaluate how similar they are to the "about me" section of his website and YouTube channel, and whether any independent sources are credited (e.g. "According to his class 9 teacher ...", "His college roommate said ...", etc.). If the bio has been supplied by him and is republished without analysis, evaluation, or interpretation by the journalist, then it is non-independent.
In my evaluation the only independent, secondary source addressing him directly and in any depth is the one review in The Daily Star mentioned above by Bruno pnm ars and Procyon117.[2] It is insufficient to satisfy WP:NBIO. --Worldbruce (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comics and animation proposed deletions

edit

Categories for discussion

edit

Redirects for discussion

edit

Templates for discussion

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Animation/Tasks&oldid=679516692"