Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dramatic Hearts

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 delete. —Cryptic (talk) 04:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dramatic Hearts

Non-notable, seems to also be vanity. Google gives only 127 results. PoptartKing 04:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

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 majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages 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 votes. 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]}}

• Delete as per nom.--み使い Mitsukai 05:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Royboycrashfan 05:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. *drew 05:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Yet it's also gained over 1,000,000 views from the DH Site and has become pretty popular for a mini-web series. MyInnerFred

please, do not delete this page. tis a funny series and it would be a shame if it was deleted.-Neosporin

• Delete advert for a non-notable website/videos that would appear to be heavily infringing on some copyrights.--Isotope23 21:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Its a parody! Its not infringing any copyrights. If anything, the subtitled cutscenes of what really is going on in the scene is more copyright infringing than Dramatic Hearts.

Wow, it's nice to see so many comments on here from people who are obviously lawyers specializing in copyright and trademark law. Hey here's an idea, why don't you send the URL for DH to Disney and Squaresoft's legal departments and see what what they think? --Isotope23 18:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Just wanted to clarify myself, since I did not use copyright as a basis for my vote to delete (I modified my original comment a bit, since the opening wasn't particularly well-ewritten), and to provide some information. I am not a lawyer, but copyright with respect to machinima is a developing issue. I'm not sure what Disney and Squaresoft's stance on this is, but many game companies seem to be allowing, at least implicitly, non-profit machinima to thrive (see [1] - "Machinima.com has informal agreements with quite a few games companies on distribution"). I fully understand the need to protect Wikipedia from copyvios, but, given that machinima seems to have been accepted by Bungie/Microsoft and Electronic Arts (who have both commissioned machinima videos from Rooster Teeth Productions, the company that produces Red vs Blue), among possibly a few other companies, there is a certain legitimacy to machinima nowadays. On the other hand, to my knowledge, neither Disney nor Squaresoft has ever taken a stance one way or the other, and so I could see a strong argument for assuming that there would be a copyvio problem with Kingdom Hearts machinima, parodies-as-fair-use notwithstanding. However, with the lack of evidence that Disney/Squaresoft disapprove, and based on the claim that DH is a parody anyway, I formed a rationale based solely on notability. Not saying that copyvio isn't a possible reason to delete a machinima article, but the situation in general with respect to copyrights and machinima is usually not clear-cut. -- TKD 02:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio was not the reason for my delete vote either. I'm not aware of any machinima copyright use cases ever being brought to court as most game companies do seem to allow this to happen. I'm just saying that in the absence of any settled case law pertaining to this, it may or may not fall under under fair use as parody. I voted delete on lack of notabilty. Copyright was just a passing comment.--Isotope23 19:46, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

It's an incredibly funny work of comedy genuis with a large number of fans. Deleting it would be a pity.

Dramatic Hearts is a work of art and comedy, to remove this page would be a shame, I'm sure if any of you actually watched Dramatic Hearts you wouldn't delete it. Long Live DH! - Tom Seiniger

All of you bigots who believe Dramatic Hearts is dumb are the same people who hate the world and/or are easily offended. It uses the same sense of humor as other popular machinimas such as Red Vs. Blue... why not delete their article? You people make no sense... long live DH! - Deathspank

It's a work of comedy, and parody. An extremely well done one with a lot of effort put into it at that. If things like Red vs. Blue, 8-bit Theater, and PvP can all have Wiki pages, including that goofy Elemenstor saga or whatever it called, could justifably fall into the same catagory, and should be deleted as well.

Have any of you people even seen DH? If you have you'd know that there is no copyright infringment whatsoever.He's not selling it to anyone. It's a well done comedy series that deserves a page on Wikipedia. VIVA DH!- Joten9115

Dude oh my god, i love dramatic hearts. ya'll can't delete it if you watched it you would so how funny it was and how it has made me laugh time and time again. please don't take these memories and laughs away. This mini-series deserves a page on Wikipedia!!! Do not delete it would make me and many other wikipedia viewers very upset. please do not delete DH it makes the many laugh-needy people of this world not go hungry!!! Long Live DH!!! - James

• Keep and cleanup. Has potential. Ardenn 04:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and cleanup. Has potential and is not infringing on any copyrights. Deathspank 11:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, somewhat reluctantly. Copyright is often not an issue with the game companies nowadays, with respect to non-commercial machinima; most machinima productions are parodies anyway and may fall under fair use. However, the big difference between this and, say, Red vs Blue, is that the latter has been well-covered in the media (see the References section of the Red vs Blue article) and has won multiple awards within the machinima community. As another example, 8-Bit Theater (a webcomic, not machinima) gets about 145,000 Google hits. One user, Drat, created, at Talk:List of machinima series, an informal list of criteria for inclusion of machinima on Wikipedia; see also WP:WEB. The issue is not with machinima itself, but that the machinima has to be notable in some way. Personally, I would like to see an example of Kingdom Hearts machinima on Wikipedia, but there has to be some standard kept. This series has received very little mention outside of a few websites. So, unless someone can show verifiable information that this series is in fact notable in some way, I'm advocating deletion. Whether the series is actually funny or not (a subjective and POV matter, anyway) is irrelevant. -- TKD 23:14, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Well language wise I've already cleaned it up a bit, to my knowledge (aside from a few words which are in character names) there are no offensive words on the page, only semi-suggestive. I would like to know why I have to "clean" up the pages when nothing is overally offensive and when Wikipedia states that it is not censored. As for popularity, what determines what makes it popular? I would consider a few thosand hits a day to make something pretty popular, to my knowledge RVB had a Wikipage far before it became as well known as it is now, before all the awards and becoming a huge hit. It's proven to be atleast semi-popular, I mean if you think it deserves deletion, well, can't stop you. I wouldn't expect a 2-3 month old series to compete with other series that have been around a good 3-5 years. MyInnerFred

Comment. Language was never the real issue for me. In fact, when people mention "clean up", it usually refers to article structure, tone, style, etc. As for Red vs Blue, the Red vs Blue article was created on 23 July 2004, after the series had won three machinima awards and had been covered in BBC News Online, Village Voice, and The Wall Street Journal. But it's not about RvB versus other machinima series as much as it is about asserting a series' own notability. Drat had mentioned popularity as a possible guideline, and this is fine as long as the popularity is verifiable (i.e., mentioned and preferably quantified in a reputable news source or online site or such). It's not the only criterion, however, and I would vote to keep if there were more third-party mention of this series — at least a few hundred Google hits, at any rate. It looks like the series has been around for some time (enough for 22 episodes), but I would have expected a series of that length to have garnered enough attention for other people to have written about it. -- TKD 00:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay, well atleast we are going somewhere with this. I understand. I personally think it's pretty popular (and do note that while it has 22 episodes many were created before the actual series was produced, it's only been around for a little more then a month actually) considering the huge amount of hits on the main site. We've never really advertised but we've gotten some advertisement on other sites and hits from all over. I've never really advertised and the main reason I made this was I pretty much considered DH to have become popular enough to warrent a simple Wikipedia page. I wasn't really aware there was a need to be popular (of any kind) just figured it had to be atleast something out there, I figured 100,000 hits+ was a good start, heh-heh. The main problem with most people writting about the game is obviously that it's not out in America and many well known KH2 fan site staff members are very pro non-spoiler items. MyInnerFred

Reply. I appreciate the rationale. Popularity isn't a requirement of notability, but it generally would be sufficient if that popularity translated into other writers and sites reviewing the series, etc. I do think that the article content itself has some potential, but there simply isn't enough notability here, in my estimation. 100,000 hits (if those are total site hits in a month) isn't really that much in the grand scheme of things; sites can get a million hits and still be non-notable. -- TKD 08:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep until finished at least RatherConfused 12:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Agamemnon2 13:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

So if I can get some reviews from well known sites then I could keep the page up? MyInnerFred

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.