Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Blanchette (second nomination)

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 of the debate was No consensus, Valid points on all sides, though in a minority, there seems to be some support for moving this to Legendary Frog. There were lot's of anons taking part here but boiled down there wasn't a consensus. The content here was (stongly) kept under a different name [1] so the issue it seems is where it should be not if it should be.. Rx StrangeLove 06:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Blanchette

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a ballot, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

A Flash animator, of which there is no shortage, article replete with "famous for" and "popular" but scores <20k ghits, re-creation of subject previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Blanchette (puppetry in evidence), but this article had a parallel existence at Legendary Frog. AfD there: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legendary Frog (Keep). The notability of Newgrounds flash animators outside of Newgrounds is open to question, and per policy I could not find any verifiable evidence of significance in reliable sources. Just zis Guy you know? 16:14, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete! LF is overrated! he steals all his jokes from the simpsons and i swear, he must watch tv with a pen and paper in his hand to write down all the jokes or something.
• Weak delete — There are a lot of pretty good artists in the world, but only a small percentage of them are really notable. If the guy has a commercial success of some type, then I'd think otherwise. Most of his works appear to be spoofs of more notable creations, rather than original works that are successes in their own right. — RJH 20:10, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn --Khoikhoi 08:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable; I have to agree wtih JzG and RJH on this one. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Don't Delete Legendary Frog is one of the most noticeable Flash Animators out there. If you think there are other Flash animators out there worth a page then make it. The bigger this site is the better. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.108.14.77 (talk •
• Don't Delete Legendary Frog is a very famous user of Flash on the internet. If we deleted an article like this, we would have to delete the article about Homestar Runner, which is BS. TheDavesr 04:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Let me remind you, "His work tends to be rather popular; several of his movies have recieved over one million views on Newgrounds."
• Keep it: Legendary frog is truly a legend, his animations have marked a new meaning for animation on the canvas known as the internet. His parodys are funny. If you watch any of them with an exception of mabey ine you would see almost instantly what im talking about.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:24.154.162.165 (talk • contribs). contribs) .
• Weak delete. I like the animations I saw, but it's just too soon.Bjones 05:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
• Don't Delete More people have heard about Legendary Frog than Andrew Dice, but he still gets an article. Joseph Blanchette has a forum with thousands of fan members. I think he's worthy of note, especially if someone wants to build the entry. It's not like we're asking the administrators to make it. There's nothing detrimental about this page. It's informative. If you can give Leeroy Jenkins, and All Your Base Are Belong to Us a page, then Legendary Frog is enough of an Internet success to include too. Yeah I know this is a second vote, but I had more to say, and I like to have the last laugh.
  • NOTE: Double vote by User:12.108.14.77. --Kinu ^t/_c 01:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but rename?. I side with the opinions so far that he is one of the more well-known Flash artists. But.. would this article stand better under the name "Legendary Frog" as opposed to Joseph Blanchette? Like the Homestar Runner article is "Homestar Runner," not "The Brothers Chaps." --Crisu 02:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. I think it's ridiculous to delete Legendary Frog's entry, he used to be really really big and his movies have been watched many many times and had a large impact on a large part of the flash community. I don't understand why EVERY SINGLE WEB COMIC EVER MADE, for example "pixel comics" with no creative value whatsoever and without much notibility can have an entry (I don't remember the names but they are indeed plentiful) when one of the most influentious flash animators can not? I don't think every flash artist should have an entry (I just voted "Delete" for Fredthemonkey.com) but the most famous should definately have a page. Mackan 14:59, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment it's not "<20k ghits" like the nominator suggests but more than 25,000 on "Legendary Frog", furthermore, a "LegendaryFrog" OR "Legendary Frog" gives 48,700 hits. I think the previous voters, obviously misinformed, should all re-consider their votes.
  • I get 13k and 15k. Fagstein 07:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    • When I click those links it says 25,000 and 26,000.Mackan 08:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Site is hosted by GeoCities for one thing. No evidence of notability. I'll change my mind if someone provides sources which indicate this isn't just another flash animator. Fagstein 07:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC) Rename to "Legendary Frog". Google results seem to indicate notability. Fagstein 04:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  • He is a flash animator but he's definately among the more famous ones. Why discriminate against flash animators but allow every single web comics, many probably seen by much much fewer people than LF's movies? Also, it's not about his homepage and where it may be hosted but about his movies, only posted on NG because he hasn't allowed them to be uploaded elsewhere. If he had, I bet they'd be over the entire web by now.Mackan 08:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Here's some evidence of his notability, except for the fact that he gets 50,000 hits on google, his original cartoon All Your Pie has been viewed 600,000 times, another original, [Kerri's big invention almost 700,000 times. A selection of his video game parodies come in at 2,700 000 hits ([2]), 1,500 000 hits ([3]), 800,000 hits ([4]), his most viewed Lord of the Rings spoof is 1,400 000 hits([5]), and generally, his many other movies have been watched somewhere in the range of 400,000-1,000 000 times. This is probably more than some television shows. He's been active since at least 2002 (the date his most popular Final Fantasy spoof was released) so there's no novelty factor to his name, there's no "he's not big enough now but might be later" (IMO). Mackan 08:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I just realised his movies can be viewed at UGOPlayer] as well, where his movies have been watched a grand total of 7,104,423 times (at time of writing). Come on people, be reasonable.Mackan 03:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Here's a list of all web comics with their own articles on Wikipedia: [[6]]. How many is that, a hundred?? I question that more than a handful of them are more known than Legendary Frog. If Legendary Frog had been half as known as he is and made comics with the same themes as his animations, then he would DEFINATELY be on that list. Can anybody explain why this is fair? Mackan 08:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment LegendaryFrog's highest listing appears at 52 on Newgrounds' top 50 in user votes. Fagstein 22:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
      • That list is VERY fickle and changes a lot every single week (in favour of new submissions), and LegendaryFrog actually holds the record of most movies in the top 50 at one time ([7](. That said, I'm not saying the list is the basis for the inclusion, not at all, it has literalyl NOTHING to do with him. I am not saying Legendary Frog should be included because of quality, but because of notability. Also, could somebody PLEASE explain why we keep all the webcomics but delete this? I'm still waiting for a response. Mackan 03:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable. Nigelthefish 20:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Very well known. He's a well respected flash artist and his name has been able to make many a flash movie noteworthy. To exclude him would cause a large upset among his fan base. In example of this would be someone such as Fred the Monkey who has made a flash showing his anger at Wikipedia for putting his entry on the cutting block.--68.102.189.69 02:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
  • It's completely irrelevant whether his fanbase would be upset or not, that has nothing to do with the purpose of Wikipedia. Mackan 03:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I may be incorrect, but my understanding is that the purpose of an encyclopedia is to give information. That is what this page does.
    • Wikipedia is not the sum of all human knowledge. Fagstein 19:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
      • I agree, but there's a big difference between Ted Smith from Boise, and Legendary Frog who has tons of fans. He's well known in the online community. If he has fans dedicated enough to make this page, then there is no reason this article should be deleated. I agree that not everything deserves a Wikipedia entry, but Legendary Frog is well known enough, and talented enough to earn one.

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.