Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nonhuman, Animated Disney Characters

: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 delete. Krimpet (talk) 18:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

=[[List of Nonhuman, Animated Disney Characters]]=

:{{la|List of Nonhuman, Animated Disney Characters}} – (View AfD)(View log)

Indiscriminate huge list; Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed. —tregoweth (talk) 01:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete - Violation of WP:NOT#DIR. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete Violates WP:NOT#DIR and it's stupid. WikiFishy 02:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions. -- Artw 05:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete. A clear violation of WP:NOT#DIR. Sr13 (T|C) 06:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete per the above. JodyB_talk 18:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Infrangible 01:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions. -- Pax:Vobiscum 12:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete I actually enjoy the article, but it has no place in an encyclopedia. Pax:Vobiscum 15:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Delete Per the nom and the other deletes. —A • D ^Torque 21:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong keep. It's not an "indiscriminate huge list" - it's a large list with clearly defined parameters. As far as I can see the article doesn't fall foul of any of the categories in WP:NOT. In particular, I don't see that WP:NOT#DIR applies - in fact "…tabular information for quick reference" seems to nicely describe the article. Because of Disney's predilection for anthropomorphising everything, it usefully complements the existing [http://www.google.com/search?q=site:en.wikipedia.org+%22list+of+disney%22 Disney lists]. It does need a lot of work, certainly, e.g. lots of wls, a proper lead section, and the actors providing the voices should be included. But I don't see why it couldn't eventually become a featured list like List of Harry Potter films cast members. Smalljim 23:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC) Note that I have no particular interest in the article - this just attracted my attention while browsing the AfD list.
Delete The list is comprised of loosely related terms. Not everything made by Disney is meaningfully connected, and Wikipedia should not create lists that could lead people to that conclusion. Jay32183 02:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep. This article is not an "indiscriminate huge list" and I don't think it has a problem with the boundaries of WP:NOT and I definitely don't consider this a directory. As was said above, Disney/Pixar anthropomorphizes everything from animals to silverware. The list does need to be cleaned up a bit, toss in some more links and adding the voice casts is a good idea, too. Useight 01:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep. It's still in the early stages. A lot of articles start off kind of sloppy before they get improved. I say keep per reasons above, and I especially agree that it could become like that Harry Potter article mentioned above, which is a pretty good article, if I say so myself. 208.187.181.70 19:48, 9 May 2007 (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.