Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants

: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 Captain Underpants. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:12, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

=[[Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants]]=

:{{la|Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Captain_Underpants_and_the_Perilous_Plot_of_Professor_Poopypants Stats])

:({{Find sources|Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants}})

Sigh. As much as i *love* the captain Underpants saga, one must admit that it fails WP:NB in many ways. The article consists of nothing but plot summaries and character listings and stuff, nothing past that. Not a bestseller, *obviously* not the subject of instruction at major schools, poorly unreferenced, not mentioned by other third party sources, just a silly childrens book. But other than a delete, we can afford a redirect to Captain Underpants. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 08:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Redirect Despite this being required reading I think at Stanford University for undergrads (I'm pretty sure I heard it from a recent graduate, or noticed it in their writing style), this title would probably be better served hanging out with it's cohort's at Captain Underpants page. Not as interesting a read as String Theory and Gravimetry, but still entertaining nonetheless. Яεñ99 (talk) 08:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

:Huh???? Required reading? Not as interesting as String Theory and Gravimetry??? Come again? Bonkers The Clown (talk) 08:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

::Lol I guess it depends on who is reading it! Regardless of the fun to be had in the discussion, I think you are on target with your suggestions Bonkers! Яεñ99 (talk) 08:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

:::Im sorry, but i don't quite understand. Graduates are required to read captain underpants??? Bonkers The Clown (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

::::Lol x2 Bonkers :) The Captain series may have been difficult reading for the attendee I infer from there...hehe. Putting it on the recommended list would probably have helped their humor and vernacular though! I ain't being too literal on the actuals here Bonkers, life has to have a little fun in it :) Яεñ99 (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Redirect to Captain Underpants. This series is notable, but this entry doesn't have enough sources focusing on it individually and in-depth enough to merit it passing notability guidelines per it having notability outside of that for the series as a whole. I found two sources, but neither are enough to warrant keeping the article.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Keep Same discussion as Captain Underpants and the Preposterous Plight of the Purple Potty People. This is part of a notable series and it thus inherits notability because the content is too long to merge into the series article. Our job at Wikipedia is to preserve content when possible. This should not be deleted simply because merging it would make an article too long. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 01:13, 2 October 2012 (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.