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
Disney Junior. Even ignoring the rampant confirmed sockpuppetry and dubious contributions from IPs, there is still a clear consensus to merge. --
RoySmith(talk) 01:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Wholly un-encyclopaedic and wholly unreferenced. This provides no content, just an endless list of when a name change occurred in multiple conries across the world with a interminable list of own web-sites - one for each country. Maybe something could be salvaged into a single paragraph, but at present it totally fails
any test for notabilityVelellaVelella Talk 14:34, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep as is notable channels, The article needs improving and sourcing alot tho but that can easily be fixed. –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 20:28, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment. Not a single channel, but your point it out as such that it amounts to understanding that it is one concept.
Spshu (
talk) 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Spshu: - I meant "Channels", Not sure why I worded it as a single channel but thanks for spotting the error.... –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge into
Disney Junior - Most of what's on this article can easily be merged & perhaps put as a table, It's simply easier to have everyone thing in one place as opposed to everything everywhere!, –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Definitely needs more reduction, but is salvageable; this article is pretty much the best solution, rather than having 20 different little articles describing each DJ network that are pretty much 'this channel offers the network's programming without any local deviation', along with 20 'fantasy TV vandal' targets. Nate•(
chatter) 21:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete easily incorporated into
Disney Junior as a table. Notability is with the US and/or general concept of Disney Jr.
Spshu (
talk) 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete - I think it could be added into Disney Junior by a table.
Spend Time Wisely... (
talk) 13:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC) stuck as confirmed sock.reply
Keep or Merge. It is a notable channel, yet it can probably be fit into the already-existing
Disney Junior page somehow. -- Matthew - (
talk ·
userpage ·
contributions) 13:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge into
Disney Junior as a table. Most of these international articles are duplicates of the main article. Most Disney Junior channels air similar programmes.
66.87.82.53 (
talk) 09:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)—
66.87.82.53 (
talk) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding
unsigned comment was added at 66.87.82.53 (UTC).reply
The above five votes should be disqualified, as all have the signs of socking by
Finealt, a user who has been blocked because of their MO of reducing international television network coverage by force. Nate•(
chatter) 02:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge Agree with above merge points.
Abroham1024 (
talk) 18:23, 11 July 2014 (UTC)reply
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.
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
Disney Junior. Even ignoring the rampant confirmed sockpuppetry and dubious contributions from IPs, there is still a clear consensus to merge. --
RoySmith(talk) 01:15, 15 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Wholly un-encyclopaedic and wholly unreferenced. This provides no content, just an endless list of when a name change occurred in multiple conries across the world with a interminable list of own web-sites - one for each country. Maybe something could be salvaged into a single paragraph, but at present it totally fails
any test for notabilityVelellaVelella Talk 14:34, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep as is notable channels, The article needs improving and sourcing alot tho but that can easily be fixed. –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 20:28, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment. Not a single channel, but your point it out as such that it amounts to understanding that it is one concept.
Spshu (
talk) 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)reply
@
Spshu: - I meant "Channels", Not sure why I worded it as a single channel but thanks for spotting the error.... –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge into
Disney Junior - Most of what's on this article can easily be merged & perhaps put as a table, It's simply easier to have everyone thing in one place as opposed to everything everywhere!, –
Davey2010 •
(talk) 13:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Keep Definitely needs more reduction, but is salvageable; this article is pretty much the best solution, rather than having 20 different little articles describing each DJ network that are pretty much 'this channel offers the network's programming without any local deviation', along with 20 'fantasy TV vandal' targets. Nate•(
chatter) 21:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete easily incorporated into
Disney Junior as a table. Notability is with the US and/or general concept of Disney Jr.
Spshu (
talk) 20:06, 7 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete - I think it could be added into Disney Junior by a table.
Spend Time Wisely... (
talk) 13:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC) stuck as confirmed sock.reply
Keep or Merge. It is a notable channel, yet it can probably be fit into the already-existing
Disney Junior page somehow. -- Matthew - (
talk ·
userpage ·
contributions) 13:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge into
Disney Junior as a table. Most of these international articles are duplicates of the main article. Most Disney Junior channels air similar programmes.
66.87.82.53 (
talk) 09:30, 10 July 2014 (UTC)—
66.87.82.53 (
talk) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding
unsigned comment was added at 66.87.82.53 (UTC).reply
The above five votes should be disqualified, as all have the signs of socking by
Finealt, a user who has been blocked because of their MO of reducing international television network coverage by force. Nate•(
chatter) 02:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Merge Agree with above merge points.
Abroham1024 (
talk) 18:23, 11 July 2014 (UTC)reply
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.